dorbie

Number 1 & 2 sound quality issues: Engine & road noise.

Nonsense. That is merely defining a standard quantity as a property of a physical object. Ensuring that units at different scales operate with a consistent numerical base which humans use for counting and units & their products (etc.) interract to produce other consistent base 10 values has great value. Having ONE consistent system also makes sense, and using the same standard definition for terms and properties within that system is so obvious that anything else seems downright idiotic. I'm not sure why anyone would argue for a medeival system of weights & measures, "that's what I grew up with" is not a strong argument, it's just inflicting your flawed past on the future. I still think in miles w.r.t. distances, and gallons & pints w.r.t. gasoline & milk. Conversion from kilometers is trivial but there's an instant intuitive gap there thanks to generations of hold-outs who contaminated my thinking with their "traditional stupidity" a pox on them. Thomas Jefferson was right and should have been listened to. We should outlaw the use of all imperial measures (& related systems) and consign them to the history books ASAP.

http://www.cnn.com/2007/LAW/06/15/duke.lacrosse.ap/index.html See attachment.

Come on you slackers, 327 posts and the question still hasn't been answered. I'd have expected you to solve this one by now.

Emphatically yes. It is temporary though. Apparently some people do not suffer from asparagus stinky pee, because they do not break down the culprit chemical. I have personally noticed this correlation after learning about it, and I wouldn't say it's really terrible, just something you might notice.

If objective proof existed that prayer worked in any way that was not purely psychological, faith would be unnecessary. Since objective proof exists that prayer does not work, what does that say about faith in prayer?

P.P.S. and we had scumbags bitching about the sinking of the Belgrano outside the exclusion zone (as if there wasn't a friggin' war going on) and demanding to know what happened to the submarine log.

There are more similarities. Tossers like Tony Ben & Red Ken were bitterly opposed to invading the Malvinas too. P.S. the left press accused Thatcher of "Jingoism" and it was at times called a cheap stunt to gain election favor for an unpopular leader nearing the end of her first term. If the movie "Wag the Dog" had been made you'd have heard the same knuckleheads use that phrase. My point; your perspective is what comes 25 years after a quick victory.

No, I take issue with your stated goals of policing speech, both on the street and the internet. This man speaking articulately on a controversial issue (whether you agree or disagree) is a prime example of the kind of freedom you threaten.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=bc4_1181735111

The mullas just know porn when they see it.

Some would make the claim that there is an inverse relationship. If one accepts that morality is innate then one might even guess at the mechanism. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fdVucvo-kDU

Tell it to Salman Rushdie.

Don't worry, Scoop will be around to arrest him soon. That will make all the problems go away.

There's no question the Republican base is almost universally pissed off over this. It's amazing to witness the executive basically giving everyone the bird. But this goes beyond their base as far as I can see. Ask a politician what happens to illegals who don't pay their fine or don't apply for a z visa. There's not even an answer to that. There's no plan and no intention of deporting anyone even with this framework in place. Newt's closing comments make a lot of sense, but it only serves to illustrate a lack of will to enforce existing laws. The government is absolutely complicit in this in the face of public opposition.

Substitute with moral.

Very impressive, and it's a great commercial. Did you do the live action composite post render inside Softimage or did you import the live action & render it within the scene?

A sign of hope? http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20070611-034232-5919r.htm It looks like CAIR's stunts and compromised leadership have backfired and they're actually an irrelevant fringe group with very little membership now. I wonder if the media will relegate them from their self-appointed position of spokes organization for U.S. muslims. They still collect a chunk of change from wealthy donors to keep them going despite their membership disaster.

I saw a black comedian who made the observation that you don't see black guys in any adventure sports. He was of the opinion that black folks have more sense than those crazy cracker mofos.

Of course! Who better than politicians to tell us how to raise our kids? You'll not find better human beings than these selfless public servants.

It's a simple thought, explaining it is the tricky part. Smoke me a kipper.....

P.S. this is only a refutation of prayer as a mechanism, not of observation as an infinitely branching individualist process that may not be simultaneously universal in all frames of reference (except for the Observer's universe), which I personally think is compelling. It still says nothing about what an observer is, in fact it hints at fractal observation potentially at all scales.

I've seen your other posts. As for the rest, it doesn't really need it. There are psychological phenomena which contribute to a belief in God, but I don't think it follows that we've labeled a part of ourselves as such. The need and belief is internal, the object of our obsession is not necessarily so. The definition of an observer is still wide open in quantum mechanics. As for prayer, it does not work, it has been tested and that is the hard science. To still say it works after a fashion you'd have to subscribe to the many infinitely bifuricating universes and your particular stream of consciousness navigating through one space-time-line as and you self-select a particular meta-outcome as an observer (as infinite versions of us would constantly do), then prayer might be a mechanism of choice. I find the theory attractive but by no means compelling but "prayer" as the mechanism absolutely uninspired and in particular looking back in time all outcomes stemmed from the same prayers, so you're left to conclude that choice is an illusion or simultaneous minds exist in different prayer/thought states as you progress. It frankly becomes messy and downright silly unless you conclude that free will is an illusion. Now that's just one theory, but one to which you're drawn at the outset but the same train of thought leads to a self-refutation I think. God is not in the gaps here. P.S. to clarify; in the process prayer itself becomes an entirely introspective thing and the outcome matching the effort of the internal mind and nothing else, since science demonstrates that prayer does not work. Hence the only refuge is in something as yet immeasurable. Simultaneously there is an internal prayer or non-prayer that leads to other undesired outcomes. You see why I conclude it becomes rather silly.

Are they? Dots can be drawn relatively easily, if you would like. As mentioned earlier, try "Quantum Evolution" by McFadden. If having will is a matter of consciousness, and consciousness is an element of quantum environment (the brain does generate an EMF) then can it be said that human will (the soul) is a focus of consciousness expressed in the form of focused neurons? Perhaps this inexplicable control of function can be defined as "God within." In other words, god comes from us. Enthus. Just another variation on God of the Gaps. Even if free-will is real, and it is dependent on Quantum level effects (neither of which is certain and both of which have weighty opposing evidence). None of this would require a God. It wasn't original when Roger Penrose touched on this 17 years ago in "The Emperor's New Mind". Just because the Bible says God gave us free will, the fact that we posess it does not prove that God exists. In fact there is massive evidence he does not if you accept conventional science, not least of which is that the Bible & it's cousins, the scant few documents that purport God's existence, are so SPECTACULARLY wrong about... everything. Perhaps you're a deist, well good luck with that, it's a bit of a nebulous claim, but again most "evidence" boils down to the "mysterious" gaps in our knowledge and those gaps are ever shifting. Quantum theory is a strange refuge for a faith based initiative.

You're the guy who can't wait to police speech on the internet, now you want to arrest ponys too?!!! Shocking leave the little guys alone, it's not their fault they're short handed.