| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"ZpiralZone" |
| Date: |
26 Dec 2005 01:07:55 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Is Evolution science? |
Regarding your non sequitur claim that [the study of] evolution can
not follow the principles of the scientific method: this is clearly
false. The evolution of life from common ancestors has been proven
beyond any reasonable doubt.
Really?
THE SCIENTIFIC WAY:
1. Observe what happens.
2. Based on those observations, form a theory as to what may be true.
3. Test the theory by further observations and by experiments.
4. Watch to see if the predictions based on the theory come true.
Please tell us who has lived long enough to observe one life form
evolved into another? according to step one, unless you believe the
above is not the scientific way or method.
.
|
|
| User: "Jason" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
11 Jan 2006 12:49:35 PM |
|
|
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
(Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
(Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
(Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will be
disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come up with
an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll just have to
wait, until it actually happens or maybe a creationist fakes some
data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until there
is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You can't have
auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing won't explain the
origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races could
explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive them? Do
you have to understand how an internal combustion engine works before you
can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car experts" to
understand these issues. Please note in my post that I mentioned
"experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
11 Jan 2006 08:07:40 PM |
|
|
Jason wrote:
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
(Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
(Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
(Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will be
disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come up with
an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll just have to
wait, until it actually happens or maybe a creationist fakes some
data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until there
is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You can't have
auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing won't explain the
origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races could
explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive them? Do
you have to understand how an internal combustion engine works before you
can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car experts" to
understand these issues. Please note in my post that I mentioned
"experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 10:05:21 AM |
|
|
In <MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
Jason wrote:
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt
Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will
be disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come up
with an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll just
have to wait, until it actually happens or maybe a creationist
fakes some data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until
there is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You
can't have auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing won't
explain the origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races
could explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me
evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive them?
Do you have to understand how an internal combustion engine works
before you can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car experts"
to understand these issues. Please note in my post that I mentioned
"experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better
engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use a
Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
And slide rules!
(Damn I wish I still had mine)
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Charity hospital closes for good
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F3D51207C
A city on hold
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y3E55207C
If Katrina was a "judgment," god hates poor people
and churches but loves a good party...
http://www.nola.com/mardigras/
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 01:03:09 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:05:21 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
Jason wrote:
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt
Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will
be disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come up
with an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll just
have to wait, until it actually happens or maybe a creationist
fakes some data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until
there is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You
can't have auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing won't
explain the origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races
could explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me
evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive them?
Do you have to understand how an internal combustion engine works
before you can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car experts"
to understand these issues. Please note in my post that I mentioned
"experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better
engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use a
Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
And slide rules!
(Damn I wish I still had mine)
I still have two or three of them around somewhere.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jason" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
11 Jan 2006 08:30:30 PM |
|
|
In article <MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
Jason wrote:
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
(Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
(Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
(Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will be
disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come up with
an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll just have to
wait, until it actually happens or maybe a creationist fakes some
data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until there
is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You can't have
auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing won't explain the
origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races could
explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive them? Do
you have to understand how an internal combustion engine works before you
can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car experts" to
understand these issues. Please note in my post that I mentioned
"experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
I doubt that learning to use a Chinese abacus would help since it does not
have any electronic parts. However, a course in the history of computers
would be of value to computer scientists.
--
NEWSGROUP SUBSCRIBERS MOTTO
We respect those subscribers that ask for advice or provide advice.
We do NOT respect the subscribers that enjoy criticizing people.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 10:06:05 AM |
|
|
In <jason-1101061830310001@66-52-22-112.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
In article <MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
Jason wrote:
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt
Silberstein <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
jason@nospam.com (Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>
wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will
be disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come
up with an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll
just have to wait, until it actually happens or maybe a
creationist fakes some data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until
there is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You
can't have auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing
won't explain the origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races
could explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me
evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive
them? Do you have to understand how an internal combustion engine
works before you can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car
experts" to understand these issues. Please note in my post that I
mentioned "experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better
engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class
in college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
I doubt that learning to use a Chinese abacus would help since it does not
have any electronic parts. However, a course in the history of computers
would be of value to computer scientists.
So what it doesn't have electronic parts? Paper and pencil don't either.
Maybe we should skip requiring math...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Charity hospital closes for good
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F3D51207C
A city on hold
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y3E55207C
If Katrina was a "judgment," god hates poor people
and churches but loves a good party...
http://www.nola.com/mardigras/
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
11 Jan 2006 08:43:53 PM |
|
|
Jason wrote:
In article <MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
Jason wrote:
In article <4jfas198eirmkg09rm8pgg8fihci8sh6pd@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 08:56:23 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
(Jason) wrote in
<jason-1101060856230001@66-52-22-79.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>:
In article <q-WdnUZBg-79C1neRVn-pw@megapath.net>, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote:
In <jason-1001061828190001@66-52-22-66.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net>,
(Jason) wrote:
In article <k3k8s1ljqq6jl7r0rk1qi78bb1m3la01is@4ax.com>, Matt Silberstein
<RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006 16:24:24 -0800, in alt.atheism ,
(Jason) in
<jason-1001061624250001@66-52-22-44.lsan.pw-dia.impulse.net> wrote:
In article <8bXwf.1248$Hd4.306@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>,
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[snip]
You have a second problem - your fond hope that abiogenesis will be
disproven hasn't happened yet. No one has been able to come up with
an experiment that will definitively disprove it. You'll just have to
wait, until it actually happens or maybe a creationist fakes some
data or something.
Is this the reason that evolutionists claim that abiogenesis is
unrelated to evolution theory?
The reason could be what we have said: there is no evolution until there
is life, so evolution can't cover the origin of life. You can't have
auto races without cars so a theory of auto racing won't explain the
origin of cars.
However, I am sure that many of the experts related to auto races could
explain to me how cars came to be. They could even show me evidence
of the
first cars.
Could you explain to me how life came to be? Could you show me
evidence of
the first cells?
Do they have to know where the cars came from before they drive them? Do
you have to understand how an internal combustion engine works before you
can start your car.
No--however, it's important for automotive engineers and "car experts" to
understand these issues. Please note in my post that I mentioned
"experts"--not regular people that drive cars.
Why?
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
I doubt that learning to use a Chinese abacus would help since it does not
have any electronic parts. However, a course in the history of computers
would be of value to computer scientists.
It's the original base 16 calculator. Think about it.
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 12:53:02 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:43:53 GMT, cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
alt.atheism
Jason wrote:
In article <MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
[]
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
I doubt that learning to use a Chinese abacus would help since it does not
have any electronic parts. However, a course in the history of computers
would be of value to computer scientists.
It's the original base 16 calculator. Think about it.
It can't.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gridleak" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 04:46:41 PM |
|
|
The usually encountered Abacus is a base ten calculator. Actually a
combination of a base five and base two. A base 16 would be possible
but not very practical. You might just as well make one to the base 1
million that could be used for most ordinary calculations but it would
just be a long string of beads.
I have been reading this whole thread and must say that some of you are
much better at suffering fools much than I am.
I can't take much more of Jasons stupidity. I say stupidity because
ignorance is curable with knowledge. With Jason you are exactly where
you were when this discussion began all the facts, explanations,and
logic presented have had no effect he has to be incurably stupid.
DON
AC7PD
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 06:30:21 AM |
|
|
of value or essential?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Liz" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 07:50:05 AM |
|
|
On 12 Jan 2006 04:30:21 -0800, "Ash" <ash.amanic@virgin.net> in news
message <1137069020.948309.55280@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
of value or essential?
Ash, could you please put a bit more context in your posts. I don't
read the group linearly and I don't know to what you are replying. I
see you are using google. If you copy what you want to reply to into
the reply box including any attribution, it would be helpful. I know
it is a pain, but . . .
Überwench #658 Now a *real* atheist!
Dame Liz the Undaunted Ath.D BAAWA
Charter Member of SMASH
and Queen of the known universe
.
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 12:07:38 PM |
|
|
Liz wrote:
On 12 Jan 2006 04:30:21 -0800, "Ash" <ash.amanic@virgin.net> in news
message <1137069020.948309.55280@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
of value or essential?
Ash, could you please put a bit more context in your posts. I don't
read the group linearly and I don't know to what you are replying. I
see you are using google. If you copy what you want to reply to into
the reply box including any attribution, it would be helpful. I know
it is a pain, but . . .
I'm sure it didn't used to do this. Or at least if it did, this is the
first time I noticed it (not this post, but reading my earlier ones, all
the context had gone)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 07:59:04 AM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:50:05 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
Liz <ehuth1@donotspam.com> wrote in
<o6ncs15t6ro86c7vi2oqq526jlg74npbua@4ax.com>:
On 12 Jan 2006 04:30:21 -0800, "Ash" <ash.amanic@virgin.net> in news
message <1137069020.948309.55280@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
of value or essential?
Ash, could you please put a bit more context in your posts. I don't
read the group linearly and I don't know to what you are replying. I
see you are using google. If you copy what you want to reply to into
the reply box including any attribution, it would be helpful. I know
it is a pain, but . . .
Google, for reasons that are impossible to fathom, hides the proper way
to reply behind 'show options' next to the time stamp at the top of the
post. If you select 'show options' and hit the 'reply' in the gray box,
you will reply with quoted text.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Liz" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 11:17:04 AM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:50:05 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
Liz <ehuth1@donotspam.com> wrote in
<o6ncs15t6ro86c7vi2oqq526jlg74npbua@4ax.com>:
On 12 Jan 2006 04:30:21 -0800, "Ash" <ash.amanic@virgin.net> in news
message <1137069020.948309.55280@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
of value or essential?
Ash, could you please put a bit more context in your posts. I don't
read the group linearly and I don't know to what you are replying. I
see you are using google. If you copy what you want to reply to into
the reply box including any attribution, it would be helpful. I know
it is a pain, but . . .
Google, for reasons that are impossible to fathom, hides the proper way
to reply behind 'show options' next to the time stamp at the top of the
post. If you select 'show options' and hit the 'reply' in the gray box,
you will reply with quoted text.
Thank you. I've been copying to get around the non-quoting default.
Memo to self: Remember "show options" I learn something new every
day.
Liz #658
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Ash" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 12:08:15 PM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 13:50:05 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
Liz <ehuth1@donotspam.com> wrote in
<o6ncs15t6ro86c7vi2oqq526jlg74npbua@4ax.com>:
On 12 Jan 2006 04:30:21 -0800, "Ash" <ash.amanic@virgin.net> in news
message <1137069020.948309.55280@g47g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> wrote:
of value or essential?
Ash, could you please put a bit more context in your posts. I don't
read the group linearly and I don't know to what you are replying. I
see you are using google. If you copy what you want to reply to into
the reply box including any attribution, it would be helpful. I know
it is a pain, but . . .
Google, for reasons that are impossible to fathom, hides the proper way
to reply behind 'show options' next to the time stamp at the top of the
post. If you select 'show options' and hit the 'reply' in the gray box,
you will reply with quoted text.
thanks, I think I can remember that
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
11 Jan 2006 10:45:22 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
....
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
.
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 01:58:17 AM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
Learning to use those would not be as useful for computer scientists as
a Chinese abacus because it is hexadecimal. That's why computer centers
would only use a Chinese abacus in case of emergencies.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 12:53:58 PM |
|
|
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
12 Jan 2006 11:01:55 PM |
|
|
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
.
|
|
|
| User: "cactus" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
13 Jan 2006 01:00:03 AM |
|
|
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
A friend of mine has a slide rule with the scales wrapped around a
cylinder, which makes them at least 10 feet long. It can multiply and
divide with at least 8 significant digits.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
13 Jan 2006 07:06:32 PM |
|
|
In <TdIxf.2089$ee6.1555@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net>, cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote:
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be
would help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and
better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class
in college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to
use a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
A friend of mine has a slide rule with the scales wrapped around a
cylinder, which makes them at least 10 feet long. It can multiply and
divide with at least 8 significant digits.
You talking about one of these or similar?
(If I had the money to be a serious "collector" type)
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Charity hospital closes for good
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F3D51207C
A city on hold
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y3E55207C
If Katrina was a "judgment," god hates poor people
and churches but loves a good party...
http://www.nola.com/mardigras/
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mike Painter" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
14 Jan 2006 01:11:20 PM |
|
|
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about
2.5 significant digits.
Slide rules were so good that they stayed in science fiction almost until
they stopped producing them.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
13 Jan 2006 10:19:07 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:00:03 GMT, cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
alt.atheism
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism
stoney <stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism
cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be would
help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class in
college and did not even major in automotive engineering.
Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
A friend of mine has a slide rule with the scales wrapped around a
cylinder, which makes them at least 10 feet long. It can multiply and
divide with at least 8 significant digits.
That's wild, but not exactly portable...
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
13 Jan 2006 07:06:53 PM |
|
|
In <1nkfs1hgq5p54livk9rtmj70tu959l6spp@4ax.com>, stoney <stoney@the.net>
wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:00:03 GMT, cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
alt.atheism
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be
would help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and
better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class
in college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to
use a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
A friend of mine has a slide rule with the scales wrapped around a
cylinder, which makes them at least 10 feet long. It can multiply and
divide with at least 8 significant digits.
That's wild, but not exactly portable...
I suspect something like this is meant:
http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/otis_king_l.html
I *want one...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Charity hospital closes for good
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F3D51207C
A city on hold
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y3E55207C
If Katrina was a "judgment," god hates poor people
and churches but loves a good party...
http://www.nola.com/mardigras/
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
14 Jan 2006 11:34:34 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 19:06:53 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in alt.atheism
In <1nkfs1hgq5p54livk9rtmj70tu959l6spp@4ax.com>, stoney <stoney@the.net>
wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 07:00:03 GMT, cactus <bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
alt.atheism
David Jensen wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be
would help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and
better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class
in college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to
use a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
A friend of mine has a slide rule with the scales wrapped around a
cylinder, which makes them at least 10 feet long. It can multiply and
divide with at least 8 significant digits.
That's wild, but not exactly portable...
I suspect something like this is meant:
http://www.vintagecalculators.com/html/otis_king_l.html
I *want one...
Ah, I see clearly now.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
13 Jan 2006 11:23:32 AM |
|
|
In <tqces15q0v8epsdbfouajmsm7jfd1etshp@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be
would help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and
better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class
in college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
I want one of these:
http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/curta2.html
I bet they're hell to find and cost a fortune though...
--
Mark K. Bilbo
--------------------------------------------------
Charity hospital closes for good
http://makeashorterlink.com/?F3D51207C
A city on hold
http://makeashorterlink.com/?Y3E55207C
If Katrina was a "judgment," god hates poor people
and churches but loves a good party...
http://www.nola.com/mardigras/
"Everything New Orleans"
http://www.nola.com
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
14 Jan 2006 11:36:32 AM |
|
|
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:23:32 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in alt.atheism
In <tqces15q0v8epsdbfouajmsm7jfd1etshp@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be
would help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and
better engines.
I recall learning about how engines came to be in at least one class
in college and did not even major in automotive engineering. Jason
It didn't help your automotive design skills did it?
I think that it might be useful for computer scientists to learn to use
a Chinese abacus, but everyone thinks that's kind of quaint.
That's right, slipsticks are the coming thing.
I've seen them, but have never used them.
Kids these days.
Slide rules are great for fast solutions, but only good for about 2.5
significant digits.
I want one of these:
http://www.oldcalculatormuseum.com/curta2.html
I bet they're hell to find and cost a fortune though...
Wild.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a cornucopia of splinters.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Is Evolution science? |
14 Jan 2006 12:36:25 PM |
|
|
In <nkdis15mo1p0vd74mpnn9q8tldlk8qmh3p@4ax.com>, stoney <stoney@the.net>
wrote:
On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 11:23:32 -0600, "Mark K. Bilbo"
<alt-atheism@org.webmaster> wrote in alt.atheism
In <tqces15q0v8epsdbfouajmsm7jfd1etshp@4ax.com>, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote:
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 10:53:58 -0800, in alt.talk.creationism stoney
<stoney@the.net> wrote in
<od9ds19v1j8ju7hndhbq09ts03fr0ujcnb@4ax.com>:
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 22:45:22 -0600, David Jensen
<david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in alt.atheism
On Thu, 12 Jan 2006 02:07:40 GMT, in alt.talk.creationism cactus
<bml@ubadlands.edu> wrote in
<MRixf.1621$Hd4.333@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net>:
Jason wrote:
...
It obvious that an understanding how engines and cars came to be
would help automotive engineers to learn how to design newer and
better engines.
I recall learning about h | | | | | | | | |
