I ain't that dainty.

Zak Tyler · Post by **Zak Tyler** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 1:33 pm

FearPeddler wrote:we were also taught pluto was a planet, spinach was loaded with iron, and there wasnt a gunman on the grassy gnoll.....

and PMS is completely mental...

oops wrong thread

fearpeddler · Post by **fearpeddler** » Wed Apr 25, 2007 2:54 pm

Zak Tyler wrote:
FearPeddler wrote:we were also taught pluto was a planet, spinach was loaded with iron, and there wasnt a gunman on the grassy gnoll.....
and PMS is completely mental...

oops wrong thread

no... PMS is just an excuse for women to be evil...

Bob Campbell · Post by **Bob Campbell** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 6:57 am

And by the way, Mars is heating up due to increased dust in its atmosphere....its own version of the greenhouse effect.

genlock · Post by **genlock** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 7:13 am

Bob Campbell wrote:And by the way, Mars is heating up due to increased dust in its atmosphere....its own version of the greenhouse effect.

Due entirely to SUV and ATV traffic.
Thats why Marvin the Martian wants to colonize Earth.

Bob Campbell · Post by **Bob Campbell** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:49 am

And all those damn uranium pu-32 space modulators!

Big Media · Post by **Big Media** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:51 am

Kind of reminds me of 24.

Bob Campbell · Post by **Bob Campbell** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:03 am

You've made me very angryyyy!

The People's DJ · Post by **The People's DJ** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:45 am

SPIKE NESMITH! · Post by **SPIKE NESMITH!** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 9:54 am

Where was the 'kaboom'? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering 'kaboom'!

fearpeddler · Post by **fearpeddler** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 12:31 pm

SPIKE NESMITH! wrote:Where was the 'kaboom'? There was supposed to be an earth-shattering 'kaboom'!

the pic of the gay man over top of your post is the 'kaboom'....

Dave Loudin · Post by **Dave Loudin** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 1:44 pm

Delays, delays!

I've got to make more Martians!

AmpedNow · Post by **AmpedNow** » Fri Apr 27, 2007 8:43 pm

I never was a "sky is falling!" environmentalist, but I do consider myself a common sense environmentalist.

I recycle everything I can as long as it's not too much of a hassle. I drive a fuel-efficient car. And, I'm in the process of changing all my light bulbs to the long-life florescent bulbs.

I see no downside to discovering cleaner ways of doing things, and finding alternate-energy methods. We all benefit when there is less waste and fewer pollutants in the air. We all benefit from cheaper fuel and utility bills. The only downsides are less record profits for Big Oil and others who stand to lose something from us modifying our ways of life.

And no, I'm not a socialist... In fact, I would argue that with the economy booming like it has been, now is the time for the private sector to put more money and ideas towards developing alternate energy, etc.

I understand that there are many socialists and communists with ulterior motives hiding behind the environmental agenda... But to discredit anything that comes from the "green" camp is throwing the baby out with the bathwater, IMO.

The evolution debate is another topic, but there's no way that the earth and universe are only 6,000 years old...

Bob Campbell · Post by **Bob Campbell** » Sun Apr 29, 2007 10:17 am

Sorry, the president says it's only 5000 years old. He hasn't been wrong about anything yet.

AmpedNow · Post by **AmpedNow** » Mon Apr 30, 2007 12:37 am

Bob Campbell wrote:Sorry, the president says it's only 5000 years old. He hasn't been wrong about anything yet.

Arp2 · Post by **Arp2** » Tue May 01, 2007 1:23 pm

The "objectivity" of modern "science"....

How you write--that is, how you string together verbs, nouns, adjectives, and adverbs to form a sentence like this one--bears an invisible stamp that actually reveals your gender.

Women use more pronouns: I, you, she, he, their, myself. Women write about people and relationships.

Men focus on words that identify or determine nouns: a, the, that. Men also use words that quantify those nouns: one, two, more. Men write about things.

This is the word from researchers at Bar-Ilan University in Ramat Gan, Israel, who developed a computer program that uses a simple algorithm to analyze writing style and determine the author's gender, reports Nature News Service. Apparently, at some deep, unconscious level, we can't hide who we are.

Just by scanning key words and syntax, the computer program is 80 percent accurate at detecting if a nonfiction book or novel was written by a man or a woman. As Nature News says, the program confirms the stereotypes we have about the differences in language use by men and women. Men really do talk more about objects, while women focus more on relationships. Men categorize. Women personalize. Men have an informational style. Women have an involved style.

Led by Moshe Koppel, the Israeli researchers tested their algorithm on 566 English-language works in numerous genres both fiction and nonfiction that were primarily published after 1975 and were able to correctly ID the author's gender 80 percent of the time.

But the idea that a computer can determine one's gender is creating quite a fuss in some academic quarters. Koppel said when he submitted his research for publication to the prestigious National Academy of Sciences, he was rejected "on ideological grounds." He told the Boston Globe, "They said, 'What do you mean? You're trying to make some claim about men and women being different, and we don't know if that's true. That's just the kind of thing that people are saying in order to oppress women.'"

Koppel insisted to the Scottish paper, The Scotsman, that he's just reporting the results of an artificial intelligence process that he considers almost flawless. Just to prove his theory correct, he ran dry, flat, academic prose through the program. Guess what? The computer won.

Again, modern "science" is about confirming what the "scientists" want to believe; all that goes against what they want to believe or advance is completely ignored and suppressed. They have completely eschewed The Scientific Method and, thus, cannot claim the title "scientist."