talse

that is an inherently dangerous and destructive method of definition though. i mean, if your definition is the antithesis of X, if you carry that ot its logical extent, your end goal is to destroy X. This leads to unnessesary conflict. i always find it so weird when people define themselves merely as the opposite of another person, it's so selling yourself short, to think you can only be a mirror or shadow of a person.

while everyone may have a choice adam, the nature of that choice and the knowledge one has reflects their society. if a black person has been taught all their life that they are supposed to talk a certain way, live a certain way, and commit crime a certain way, your gonna get incarceration rates that excede college entrance rates. and that just ain't right.for more observation on the sociological effects on people, check out the movie fight club from your local library, if you have one (god, i can't beleive i had to make that stipulation, people need to move to iowa city.)

you certainly can't get an endorphin rush playing civ 3, thats for sure.

jesus clearly couldn't have had kids. it works like this.1.) jesus is a super cool guy and doesn't act like a jerk to anyone2.) jesus knew in advance he was going to be A) crucified and go top side when his brief revisit after the death thing.3.) people who leave their kids to their mother are jerks to their kids and they're wivesSO from this we can conclude several things.jesus, knowing about 2 and following 1 had to avoid being 3 so he couldn't have had kids. QED

well, as to your environment question, how much does venus exclipsing the sun effect our environment? not a whole lot, eh? as to your second(chronologically first) point, i imagine 1000 square km of solar panels would provide an ample amount of power at that proximity to the sun. you've got to remember, 2things are blocking the suns own fusion reaction from powering us. 1, we're pretty far away from that dayball, and 2, we've got all this pesky atmosphere in the way. so putting the cells within the orbit of venus would make it very efficient compared to our terrestrial based ones. and there has to be some way for a fusion reactor on earth to go haywire, i don't care what the odds, what was that one guys law that went like " if something can go wrong, it will"? i just don't like having miniature suns on my planet. make it lunar based or used cells near venus.

i tihnk your asking a loaded question. very few inventions have produced no new negative side effects. but i think that the nature of computers role in entertainment is a bit bloated. a really bad turn was when we decided we wanted realistic graphics. bad idea in my book, lots of fun games that ahve really un realistic graphics, and if i want realism, i'd go play out side. i live in a psudeo urbanized area. iowa city, it has a lot of the plusses of urbanization like liberalism and convenient bikable distances, but also a lot of the nature is still findable. so i rock climb and bike and practice martial arts int he forest and stuff.

i think your mis interpreting my idea. see, we use solar electricity, only we put them way closer to the sun so it's more effective. and to get the energy back, we use a laser. this method has been proven to wrok, laser transmitted energy that is.

i don't it was so much out of malovolence that they developed this distaste for one another, but a lack of definition of them selves.see, a long time ago people defined there cultures by not being the other person. sort of like everyone, and i mean everyone was one of those non-conformists cause they didn't want to be like the others, not because they felt like bing different.like they were defined by not being them. ambiguity intended. you know, so it can be applied to a wide variety of circumstances.

i remember doing some math with my dad at a sushi restaurant one night, and we concluded that memory has become either a billion times cheaper, or a trillion times, i don't remember which, in the last 20 years. it should be pretty close to that, what with that 18th month rule thing, expanded over 20 years. thats a lot of doublings and halvings.

the shroud doesn't serve any tangible purpose that i see of though. it's at best a representation and reminder of an idea. that man can rise above the grade and care for others in a selfless way, without ungodly amounts of blood shed(thank you very much, mel gibson, now go rot). so whether or not it's authentic shouldn't matter. seeing as it represents an idea of +20 intangibility.

if i'm not mistaken, sects are just parts or diviations from larger faith structures. like the janes are sect of budhism and evangelicals, may god have mercy on their misdirected and spitefilled souls, are a sect of christianity.

well, the epsicopalian church differs greatly from most sects of christianity in how it responds to those in search of answers. most churches will say they have all the answers, which is impossible, after some time, unffulfillment hits them head on.episcopalians answer the call to arms with an invitation to join the search, kind of like, "we don't know the answers either, but we'd love it if you'd come looking with us."This allows a much more dynamic view on the way the world works, also, a very individualist church.For instance, i percieve the bible and many of it's laws a stop gap set of rules to keep humanity from destroying it's self while it grew up enough to make decisions on it's own. for instance, god told us the story of genesis the way she did because we just wouldn't have been able to comprehend the big bang. he also told us a bunch of laws because she knew we wouldn't have been able to excercise the apropriate amounts of moderation necesary to avoid abuse.

open minds are actually a necesity to being a good christian, i can't say for other faiths seeing as i am not of them. but as an epsicopalian we see a lot of things, and you have to keep your mind open to possibilities and circumstances. for instance, many sects of christianity condemn homosexuality. epsicopalians do not due to the fact that scientific evidence points to the fact that it is not a choice really on there part and they are born with it. and to say people can go to hell for something they were born with is like saying black people go to hell because they were born black. but we don't condone murder cause that was totally a choice deal. if you kill someone, you better realize that your a bad person and ask for forgiveness before your dead or else your gonna have to go through the inferno.

i just think it's important that we as scientists keep open minds to various possibilities. and i also think as christians it's important that we try to understand others before we ridicule them, to make sure that they are in fact worth ridiculing and we don't end up being roman.

exactly, that .1 is the difference that was made many years ago from our commen ancestor with apes. it's like this, primitive ape colony prime (happy monkies) then a land divide happened, now we have primitive ape colony A, and B, A is still in the jungle, B is stuck tree-less (A, happy/||\B, unahppy) as time progressed, the environment selected for a more flat landish variety of monkey, thus B became us! and A developed slowly with not really much variation on selection pressures. as such now it's (A, happy, but only cause they don't know what b's doin /everywhere else\ B extremely happy and fat, also us) and thats how it pretty much went down.

my idea ofr an alternative for fusion doesn't involve anything new, jtus a synthesis of what is here. carbon nanotubes make the space elevator, solar cells are put into orbit around the sun, we don't actually do anything to it(the sun) and then we use lasers to beam the energy back to earth from venus. it's pretty safe and no potential kaboom on top of that, we can ahve it up and running post haste.

i chuckle at an amusing idea. so terrorists wanna destroy america, right? well, if they could fly up there and use a large enough explosion, they could push the asteroid and blow up the earth. but that would be silly.

actually, there must have been some razors, because in the story of samson, his hair was cut off. they could have very easily applied similar technology to remove facial hair follicles.

however we get energy, regardless of nature, we're still creating tremendous amounts of power thus pottential boom on the earth. it's much more preferable to have any safety hazards off planet. and if we're moving the operation into space, we may as well just use the readily available fusion reactor we already have.

i still don't see why we have to be so pessimistic. nintendo can always be counted on to deliver the quality goods. have some imagination, lacking.while the game cube had far fewer titles then the PS2 or death-box, it had just as many high quality ones, if not more.

it's not like it'll be that hard to avoid ea games. i mean mostly they did sports games, and those weren't very good, and with this new monoply deal, they'll have no reason to improve them in any tangible way except make them prettier. big whoop, i can get realistic football by getting my ball out and playing it.i only have one ea game, thats lotr third age.

whats even sadder is that christians condemn most sciences and most scientists condemn christians and religion in general. do you know how hard it is to get people to beleive that you're both a scientist and an epsicopalian? ain't easy, i assure you.

i've got a number of faveorites. on the list, goldeneye, wind waker, pikmin, harvest moon in all it's incarnations, specifically 64, smash brothers melee, starcraft bw, D2 LOD, and civ 3. also puzzle pirates. my response to those who argue in favor of realism of football games as a good thing, well, keep in mind, it's football. the practicioners of this sport have opressed us for years.

terrestrial fusion reactors are potentially hazordous, there are so many cooler things to be done with oil then burn it, and we happen to orbit a great fusion reactor but we've got that pesky atmosphere and distance thing getting in the way. may i postulate an alternative?space elevators provide easy acess to space. space hasn't got any weather patterns that could sufficiently block solar panels that are in orbit aroudn earth. but why bother blotting out our skies killing animal and plant life on our planet?move the cells into and orbit similar to that of venuses, tons of energy to be had, and neglible effect on us. we use a laser to beam the energy back to us and we have a continuous energy supply using technology that we all have right now.

ok, as a christian, i'm gonna use some of my god given brain to asess some knowledge.first off, the prinicples darwin observed to conclude evolution and explain it.1.) there is more population then food for a population (borrowed from malthus)2.) there are variations in a given population (population defined as group of animals that can produce offspring that can reproduce.)3.) some of these of variations are more beneficial to surviving to reproduce then others4.) many variations can be transmitted to offspring (DNA,yo)5.) animals will progress over time to survive best under the present selective pressures.also, hardy weinburg pretense necesary for genetic equilibrium, or non-evolutionlarge population, no mutations, no selecting pressures, no mating preference, no out breeding.humanity has a huge population, no selective pressures save diesease. but we of course have mutations, but they often manifest in defects, rarely beneficial. we also have mating preference, which would you rather shag, hot person, or fat dumpy person? see, mating preference. the point i'm getting at is humanity isn't evolving in the biological sense, only technologically.now, onto the case for ape/pre-ape->human. lets look at the DNA, i'll now use a guide for checking whether or not someone cheated on a paper. if 2 papers read very similarly, that doesn't necesarily mean they cheated. if they use a lot of the same words, not necesarily cheater. if they use a quote, the same one, they might not be cheating. but if they made the same errors in transcribing that quote, guess what, they cheated. modern chimps have a very similar paper to us. but whats even more convincing is that they have the same strands of useless DNA as we do, the same mistakes.also, to those who said someone made humans like we are cause we work so well, have you seen how "well" we work? if we were designed, it was very poorly.