Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 30 Jul 2013 @ 12:41pm
"That's exactly right. Sometimes taking a neutral stance on an issue of great importance is the equivalent of making the wrong choice. MIT missed the boat here."
There's that quote about the only thing that needs to happen for Evil to win is that Good does nothing. While it may be simplistic, it has the nugget of truth. (Also, Evil wins when Good is Dumb.)
Doing nothing, or remaining neutral, is lazy. And hiring lawyers to do what is legally justifiable without investigating what is ethically correct (or even ethically reasonable) is showing how little you care.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 30 Jul 2013 @ 11:13am
Re: Re: No Big Surprise
"Tough on crime" is a label most politicians want associated with their name, since that generally appeals to the authoritarian-minded voters without much downside.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 30 Jul 2013 @ 11:06am
Re:
In my mind espionage is nearly synonomous with, or a subset of, aiding the enemy. Basically something along the lines of 'having access to secret governmental information and giving it to a foreign power'. If that foreign power (government or not) is an enemy, then you're aiding them.
Is this another case where the government is using different definitions of words than what ordinary language would imply?
Simply waving your hands and claiming my position is faith-based does not make it so.
Evolution has been observed happening. Just because you are unwilling to recognize that it has does not mean it didn't happen.
No one living "observed" the millions of years it took for humans and chimpanzees to diverge from their common ancestor, but we have plenty of evidence that shows it happened - multiple seperate lines of genetic evidence, and some limited fossil evidence, and others. Just because you are unwilling to recognize it does not mean that evidence doesn't exist.
Please read the description at the bottom. I'll quote:
"This diagram is a cladogram... "
"Each clade is defined by a distinguishing characteristic... "
"Sometimes that characteristic disappears in later organisms"
"Some well-known groups of organisms are not clades - including reptiles, protists, fish, invertabrates, sponges, and prokaryotes - because they do not include all descendants of the most recent common ancestor."
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Jul 2013 @ 6:56am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
one species evolved into another.
Your comment shows a serious misunderstanding of evolution. One species does not evolve "into" another. There is not a singular instant where a species becomes another. The descendants of a single species can diverge into seperate species. The typical example is a population of a single species that is cut off from the rest of its species, such as on an island. That population can change over succsessive generations, adapting to a different environment from the rest of its kind that are elsewhere. Over time, those changes add up into something distinctive, and in which even if re-united will not or cannot interbreed.
A chimpanzee does not evolve into a human. But both humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor that lived around 5-7 million years ago.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Jul 2013 @ 6:47am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
This^.
You can easily tell scientific arguments from faith based arguments by asking the question: "Can you imagine some type of evidence that when confirmed, could change your views?"
I can imagine all sorts of things that could change my views on evolution if they are proven. The classic example is fossilized rabbits in the Pre-Cambrian.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 26 Jul 2013 @ 6:38am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There's a fly in the ointment: evolution as it's taught has never been observed in nature. Not once.
It has been actively observed happening many times. Antibiotic resistance in bacteria (thousands of studies). The shape of the beaks of the finches of the Galapagos (a decades long study still underway). And that's just me naming two before I've had my caffiene this morning.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 Jul 2013 @ 11:30am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Crade, be careful making generalizations about "all scientists" and saying things make no difference.
There are many scientists who would disagree with your statements. It may not be possible to absolutely prove we're not all under the control of a malevolent deity, or in the Matrix, or a brain in a jar, but there's no good reason to think that it is so when there are better explanations that do not include those complexities.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 Jul 2013 @ 11:13am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Simply saying something is not a fact does not make it so. There are many seperate lines of evidence showing evolution through natural selection is correct. Sure, there's the fossil record, which is spotty, but we've also got genetics (something entirely new and which Darwin had no knowledge of when he put forth the theory - and something which could have disproven the theory but instead supported it), there's geographical distribution of species, and more.
Of course we know how the Egyptians built the pyramids - they kept amazing records (the only way to organize such an effort), some of which have survived. There may be a few quibbles over which of a few techniques were used for certain things, but the architecturing methods of the time were sufficient to accomplish the task given the resources they had. I'm not familiar with any controversy over Easter Island other than we're not sure why the monument heads were erected.
Yes, there were many intelligent writers way back in history. Even recently, some very intelligent people believe in nonsense - Isaac Newton was an alchemist (trying to turn lead into gold). The savages I'm referring to are the ones who waged war and committed genocides for not bowing down to their chosen deity. Savagery and intelligence are not mutually exclusive.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 25 Jul 2013 @ 10:04am
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Simply using the term "missing link" shows a fundamental misunderstanding of evolution. The term implies that there is a distinct moment that one species becomes another.
Yes, evolution can happen quickly, typically when organisms are stressed out by changing environments (in other words when selection pressures are strongest). It's not that at those times fossils stop forming - its that the likelihood of any particular organism becoming a fossil is vanishingly small. Greater than 99.9% of the species that have roamed the earth in its ~4.7 billion year history are extinct. There are entire genuses and families that we are unlikely ever to come across evidence of. That we have so many well preserved fossils is amazingly in and of itself.
But don't let facts and an organized, critical method for determining the truth stop you from believing fairy tales told by bronze age savages.
On the post: Former NSA Lawyers Attack Senator Wyden For Hinting At NSA Surveillance Excesses That Are Now Confirmed
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Which I'd recommend regardless of whether it proved anything.
On the post: Microsoft Sends Google DMCA Takedowns For Microsoft's Own Website
Re: Re:
If you adjust your perspective to being sociopathic, you can find the good in all sorts of fucked up situations.
On the post: MIT Defends Its 'Neutral' Stance On Aaron Swartz As 'Reasonable' Even As It Failed To Understand Importance Of The Case
There's that quote about the only thing that needs to happen for Evil to win is that Good does nothing. While it may be simplistic, it has the nugget of truth. (Also, Evil wins when Good is Dumb.)
Doing nothing, or remaining neutral, is lazy. And hiring lawyers to do what is legally justifiable without investigating what is ethically correct (or even ethically reasonable) is showing how little you care.
On the post: Bradley Manning Found Not Guilty Of Aiding The Enemy But Convicted On Other Charges
Re: Re: No Big Surprise
On the post: Bradley Manning Found Not Guilty Of Aiding The Enemy But Convicted On Other Charges
Re:
Is this another case where the government is using different definitions of words than what ordinary language would imply?
On the post: Former NSA Lawyers Attack Senator Wyden For Hinting At NSA Surveillance Excesses That Are Now Confirmed
Re:
On the post: ASCAP Asks FCC To Block Pandora From Buying Radio Station, Because ASCAP Doesn't Like Pandora
Re: Re: Re: This is again Mike merely favoring NEW gatekeepers.
On the post: Feds Say It's Classified Info To Say Who We're At War With
sad
"We've always been at war with [REDACTED]."
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Would you care to address any of the actual points in the discussion, or do you want to keep knocking down your own strawmen?
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
http://www.tellapallet.com/tree_of_life.htm
---
The primary sources for this illustration are: The journal Science (13 June 2003: Vol. 300. no. 5626). ( http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/summary/300/5626/1691 )
The NIH on-line taxonomy browser ( http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/ )
---
If you follow the links in the Science journal, you'll see links to the the many papers laying out all the evidence.
This is fun. Give me some more links to things that support my argument and make you look silly.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Evolution has been observed happening. Just because you are unwilling to recognize that it has does not mean it didn't happen.
No one living "observed" the millions of years it took for humans and chimpanzees to diverge from their common ancestor, but we have plenty of evidence that shows it happened - multiple seperate lines of genetic evidence, and some limited fossil evidence, and others. Just because you are unwilling to recognize it does not mean that evidence doesn't exist.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Please read the description at the bottom. I'll quote:
"This diagram is a cladogram... "
"Each clade is defined by a distinguishing characteristic... "
"Sometimes that characteristic disappears in later organisms"
"Some well-known groups of organisms are not clades - including reptiles, protists, fish, invertabrates, sponges, and prokaryotes - because they do not include all descendants of the most recent common ancestor."
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your comment shows a serious misunderstanding of evolution. One species does not evolve "into" another. There is not a singular instant where a species becomes another. The descendants of a single species can diverge into seperate species. The typical example is a population of a single species that is cut off from the rest of its species, such as on an island. That population can change over succsessive generations, adapting to a different environment from the rest of its kind that are elsewhere. Over time, those changes add up into something distinctive, and in which even if re-united will not or cannot interbreed.
A chimpanzee does not evolve into a human. But both humans and chimpanzees share a common ancestor that lived around 5-7 million years ago.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You can easily tell scientific arguments from faith based arguments by asking the question: "Can you imagine some type of evidence that when confirmed, could change your views?"
I can imagine all sorts of things that could change my views on evolution if they are proven. The classic example is fossilized rabbits in the Pre-Cambrian.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It has been actively observed happening many times. Antibiotic resistance in bacteria (thousands of studies). The shape of the beaks of the finches of the Galapagos (a decades long study still underway). And that's just me naming two before I've had my caffiene this morning.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
There are many scientists who would disagree with your statements. It may not be possible to absolutely prove we're not all under the control of a malevolent deity, or in the Matrix, or a brain in a jar, but there's no good reason to think that it is so when there are better explanations that do not include those complexities.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Of course we know how the Egyptians built the pyramids - they kept amazing records (the only way to organize such an effort), some of which have survived. There may be a few quibbles over which of a few techniques were used for certain things, but the architecturing methods of the time were sufficient to accomplish the task given the resources they had. I'm not familiar with any controversy over Easter Island other than we're not sure why the monument heads were erected.
Yes, there were many intelligent writers way back in history. Even recently, some very intelligent people believe in nonsense - Isaac Newton was an alchemist (trying to turn lead into gold). The savages I'm referring to are the ones who waged war and committed genocides for not bowing down to their chosen deity. Savagery and intelligence are not mutually exclusive.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'll wait.
On the post: Democratic Leadership Says NSA Data Collection Is Fine Because You 'May Be In Communication With Terrorists'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yes, evolution can happen quickly, typically when organisms are stressed out by changing environments (in other words when selection pressures are strongest). It's not that at those times fossils stop forming - its that the likelihood of any particular organism becoming a fossil is vanishingly small. Greater than 99.9% of the species that have roamed the earth in its ~4.7 billion year history are extinct. There are entire genuses and families that we are unlikely ever to come across evidence of. That we have so many well preserved fossils is amazingly in and of itself.
But don't let facts and an organized, critical method for determining the truth stop you from believing fairy tales told by bronze age savages.
Next >>