What is Digg?165 Comments
- electromage, on 06/03/2008, -3/+78How many stories about it finding "maybe ice" can we have?? Analyse it already!
- inactive, on 06/03/2008, -8/+77๏̯͡๏) ~weeelcooom eeeerflings i aaam aleaaaan
/|\
_|
/\ - jflowers45, on 06/03/2008, -6/+60...or dandruff...
- perhapsimcrazy, on 06/03/2008, -1/+46Wrong Robot Picture
- sanman, on 06/03/2008, -3/+32Flakes on a Plain!
- inactive, on 06/03/2008, -6/+33๏̯͡๏==/\===/\
hey i am undrground worm alean! how do you do! - fluidfoundation, on 06/03/2008, -2/+26That's not an alien, that Mr. Burns!
- borez, on 06/03/2008, -1/+24Or cocaine
- bananaspiders, on 06/03/2008, -0/+18Hey... I know you... yes... the preacher that can relate anything they read to their fear... the fear of being wrong about god... about spending your life looking for something that isnt there...
I wish people like you, instead of sitting around preaching... would contribute something to society towards the better understanding of the universe in which we live in... - staffa, on 06/03/2008, -0/+17"it may be guaranteed"
What kind of oxymoronic statement is that? If you buy my car insurance, you may be guaranteed against damage to your car? Is it or is it not guaranteed?
The bible also didn't mention computers, jet airplanes, you, the earth being a sphere, the earth orbiting the sun, atomic energy, microwaves, kangaroos, the grim adventures of Bbilly and Mandy, next years Oscars winners and a few other things here and there. But assuredly the absence of mention here means something concrete.
I give you props for putting your foot down so firmly in a manner in which you can very likely be proved wrong, in your life. I hope it doesn't shake your faith, though I think it's a really stupid idea to base your faith on what the Bible doesn't say.
Also, the universe is a loving treasure of beauty and design regardless of the point of view. It doesn't matter if the design comes from a higher intelligence or as the result of the physical laws of nature. Regardless of who is right, believing otherwise doesn't change it; It is still beautiful. - Hockey13, on 06/03/2008, -1/+18Or...ANTHRAX!!!! Ahhhhh! DEFCON -56! Terror alert burgundy! Bomb Mars!!
- swazo, on 06/03/2008, -5/+21what's with all the retarded posts?
this is cool ***** people. - crapuccino, on 06/03/2008, -3/+17Hello Alan. Where would you like us to set up a Starbucks franchise?
- noseeme, on 06/03/2008, -2/+14Oh, haha, I see what you did with the title! You made it sound like someone from Digg actually has something to do with a space program!
- ApokalypseNow, on 06/04/2008, -0/+11First, stop making up words like "evolutionist" - there's "scientists" and then there's "creationists" ie "morons".
Next, so-called "creation science" has no evidence for their positions, so why should science be either running or scared from something that can't perform tests, can't make predictions, can't show evidence, and can't solve any problems?
As usual, your mythological text has no bearing on reality, so stop bringing it up. - Navicerts, on 06/03/2008, -5/+16Give this one a title that suggests digging has already started eh? Kinda like the other story with the title suggesting that ice was already found. buried.
"NASA’s newest spacecraft got down and dirty on Mars, taking its first practice scoop of Martian soil ahead of the actual dig expected later this week, scientists said Monday." - SQLserver, on 06/03/2008, -0/+11Dude... Are you serious.
You must be one of those dudes from the 'BSD is satanic' article that recently hit the front page, no one can seriously be this stupid.
Wow. This is just so pathetic. - whiteknives, on 06/03/2008, -1/+11Suicide trip, no. One way trip, probably. I forget what the article was called, but there was a marine platoon that said they were all willing to make a one-way trip to settle on Mars and to make way for future settlers. Humanity made its greatest achievements when faced with "no turning back" situations. Columbus didn't know if he was going to live to see Spain again when he sailed for the West Indies. The gold rush in the 1800's led to multitudes uprooting themselves to settle on new ground. Such cowards we have become if fear of the unknown has stunted our ambition and forward thinking.
- Slovenian6474, on 06/03/2008, -2/+12a war
- ApokalypseNow, on 06/04/2008, -0/+10This claim is nothing more than an excuse that design theorists (and indeed, creationists) use to try to explain away their own failure to make their case. When someone proposes a new scientific theory, it is that person's responsibility to make a case for it. Scientific theories have, in the past, achieved wide acceptance despite strong cultural and scientific resistance. (Evolution itself is an example.) If there is substance to ID theory or creationism, its proponents must make it clear.
To all appearances, design theorists and creationists have blinded themselves to seeing flaws in their "theories". Their religious motivation is obvious. Just as important, they do not follow the usual scientific procedure of testing their ideas. A scientific theory is tested by subjecting it to a very real chance of falsification. Scientists make specific predictions based on the theory, look to see if the predictions pan out, and consider the theory false if the results cannot fit what was expected. Intelligent design theorists and creationists, unlike evolutionary scientists, do not put their ideas to such risks. Apparently, they do not want their ideas at risk. - Clugenheim, on 06/03/2008, -1/+11Is that a penis?
- ozydingo, on 06/05/2008, -0/+9Hint: when you say "zero uncertainty," especially when it is in reference to something you and the human race knows very little about, people stop listening to you.
- ApokalypseNow, on 06/05/2008, -0/+9Evolution is an observable, and indeed, repeatable process - look up nylon-eating bacteria some time. Further, how do you suppose antibiotic-resistant bacteria came to be? Or cold and flu bugs that are different every year? Have you ever seen the fossil progression of foraminifera?
Just because you don't like a field of science because it shows your mythology to be false is no reason to call it "criminal". - eir574, on 06/04/2008, -0/+8There may be little point from his point of view as well. If you've been following kenrayd's posts over the past couple of days, you may have noticed that he stated quite clearly that people who don't worship something can't be considered completely human.
- inactive, on 06/03/2008, -0/+8Daylight on Mars is a different color than daylight on Earth. They used bright red, green and blue LEDs in close proximity to the soil sample so they could control the intensity and color of the light to closely simulate Earth color temperature, D65. That is what that dirt would look like if it was in your hand here.
- ApokalypseNow, on 06/04/2008, -0/+8"The need to worship was built into humans as much as eyesight."
So then, is a blind man somehow less human than a sighted man? Is he "not human at all", in your own words?
In any case, your statement is false. Atheists do not worship. - chrisOrbit, on 06/03/2008, -0/+8Wow... just wow. I'm not even gonna try to make points or bring up facts. You wont listen anyways.
- apmtt, on 06/03/2008, -1/+9Yeah man why are we even exploring the solar system the bible never said it's important at all ***** space dude and ***** those scientists it's not like science ever did good things for anyone right
- ApokalypseNow, on 06/05/2008, -0/+7"If I understand what God has revealed about Himself in Scripture, He would not start life just arbitrarily."
You assume that your mythological deity is involved with abiogenesis without evidence.
"Mars and the other planets have beauty in and of themselves, but to leave a bunch of microbes that no one enjoys, would not be in harmony with the Biblical justification for life."
Life does not require "justification" or "enjoyment" by other parties, just the right chemical sequence of events.
"Not only do I know for a certainty that no life is on Mars because of Biblical support..."
You are choosing a poor source for your assertion that Mars lacks life, one that has been shown wrong on many matters of science and history.
"If they fail, then you'll know I told you so."
...or it could be that they're checking the wrong place - ever hear of extremophiles? Or it could be that life has taken a form on Mars that we do not yet understand - or any number of other possibilities. - piesforyou, on 06/03/2008, -0/+7Then we'd have an almost limitless source for the most expensive cocaine EVER!?
- linuxpenguin, on 06/03/2008, -1/+8You suck at spelling. . .
SPOILER: This article has nothing to do with Digg, poster just doesn't know how to spell "dig". - ApokalypseNow, on 06/05/2008, -0/+7"Evolution to higher forms (subjective belief) which contradicts the Bible has never been repeated nor observed. "
You're still treating evolution as if it were a goal-oriented process of somehow becoming "higher" or "better". This is not how evolution works. Define a "higher form" for me, and be specific.
"The bacteria that changes is still a bacteria."
Evolution does not require speciation, merely adaptation to better fit and compete in their environment.
"That capacity was built into organisms at creation."
Evidence for this assertion? - CrackyJSquirrel, on 06/03/2008, -0/+6And salt would hopefully mean soft pretzels for everyone..
- eir574, on 06/05/2008, -0/+6"He finishes the job, not just leave it with only some bacteria all over the place. "
A 'finished job' could never end with bacteria? You know the mind of god that well? Congrats! - jackmon, on 06/03/2008, -1/+7If they'd had relatively inexpensive robots in Columbus' day, they probably would have sent a robotic mission first.
Also, Columbus wasn't going to a place where there was no breathable air, or where temperatures plunged to -200 in the winter. - Squidwalk, on 06/05/2008, -0/+6What is it an objection to? Did your strange statement address any part of my previous comment?
That is a nonsensical objection anyway. To establish an objective fact, it is necessary to prove a it via reproduction on demand. For your god to be objective, even non-believers must meet him in reality, and on a quantifiable basis. Your "proof" is indistinguishable to others from a scenario where you are simply lying and saying you observed your deity. That's called "subjective." - ApokalypseNow, on 06/05/2008, -0/+6"You're a strange one but that's a symptom of denial."
You continue to assert that I am somehow in denial, but you have yet to produce any evidence for your own position.
"Do you realize that if you go over what you just said, you are virtually denying evolution, saying that evolution doesn't work as far as increasing the higher order of organisms."
That you think this only underscores your poor understanding of evolutionary biology, and your poor reading comprehension. Evolution is defined as the adaptation of a population to better fit and compete in an environment due to selection pressures acting upon heritable traits that vary throughout the population itself. Nowhere in that definition is there a mention of "higher order" or speciation. Evolution can add traits or remove them, it can make a population more complex or simpler - it all depends on the environment and how the selection pressures act, and further on what variability the population has for those pressures to act upon. In whatever way the adaptations happen, they happen - that life may become more complex through this process is not germane to the process itself, except in that it can lead to more traits to vary.
I note that you still have not specifically defined a "higher form", nor have you produced evidence for any of your previous assertions. - LimeParrot, on 06/03/2008, -0/+6um yeah wtf?
- ApokalypseNow, on 06/05/2008, -0/+6"Consider this objection. Knowing the Creator is objective because when one calls on Him without bias, they will get feedback from Him and they will meet Him personally and in reality."
Again, your proposed experiment is a personal, subjective experience not able to be witnessed by third parties. It fails the test for objectivity, why do you insist on calling it such?
"Contrarily, belief that life evolved on it's own to higher and higher creatures is purely subjective."
This is incorrect on two levels - one being that creatures have "higher and higher" levels - evolutionary biology makes no such distinction, merely measurements of how well a population is adapted to its environment. The second is that you call it subjective, when it is an observable and repeatable process, backed by a preponderance of objective, empirical evidence (that exists no matter what your preconceptions are) and peer review. The science of evolutionary biology, and indeed, the Theory of Evolution, is anything but subjective. What special study or knowledge of the field do you have to make such an assertion that the experts in the field are wrong, and that the field of study, upon which countless life-saving medical discoveries are based, is worthless? - ApokalypseNow, on 06/05/2008, -0/+6"In that context, if man-made method scientists even found so much as a bacteria on Mars, it would boost their evolution beliefs."
It would be more accurate to say that, if they found bacteria on Mars that could be shown to definitely have Martian origins, then it would demonstrate that life can and did occur on another planet, under greatly differing conditions than that on Earth.
"They would say that life got started evolving on Mars and that's how far it got."
You say "how far" as if evolution was some kind of race - it is not. Evolution is not a goal-oriented process, merely a process of adaption to fit the environment. If life exists on Mars, then it is life as it adapted to the conditions present on Mars - that's it.
"That's what I meant by life on Mars in relation to the Bible, comparing it to earth."
As usual, your book of mythology has no bearing on reality. - borez, on 06/03/2008, -4/+10Just test the damn stuff and stop speculating please
- apmtt, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6The absurdness of my replies is directly proportional to how much sarcasm they contain. At least the lack of commas and fullstops should have given it away.
- staffa, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6You have mighty big balls to go up to God and tell him exactly what he would do on all non Earth like planets.
I have read the bible and a circle is not a sphere. In the context of the bible it logically fits with the rest of the statements to mean a disc, like a coin.
http://sol.sci.uop.edu/~jfalward/Flat_Earth.htm
Also, here is an example of someone else who took the bible literally and was positive they were right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair - badjoke, on 06/03/2008, -1/+7http://msnbcmedia3.msn.com/j/msnbc/Components/Phot ...
Did anyone else think that was a footprint, on the right? - Squidwalk, on 06/04/2008, -0/+6Sadly, what kenrayd says it somewhat true. Not the "inhuman" part, but the compelled to worship part. It fits in well with theories like Francis Heylighen's Memetic Selection Criteria. His subjective and intersubjective criteria all point to a human predisposition to religious behavior. http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/MEMSELC.html
In the end, I suppose only education can surmount the needs like simplicity and conformity. It is always easier to rest on basic beliefs and enforced norms than to be epistemically responsible and challenge authority figures. Without education to explain to us the advantages these difficult courses of action impart, there's no reason not to keep to the path of least resistance and most shininess. - solowCX, on 06/03/2008, -0/+6LEDs
- PCDestroyer, on 06/03/2008, -2/+7the only color you can see on mars is red because of the atmosphere. That means all objects on mars either reflect the red color or just show black. So they used white light (red+green+blue=white) to see what the colors of the sample really are.
- HanSolo69, on 06/03/2008, -0/+5Have they found the giant bead we traded the Martians for all of their land?
- TritonX, on 06/04/2008, -0/+5How about we put a base on the moon first, it should help us solve some of the logistics.
- piesforyou, on 06/03/2008, -0/+5Do you think NASA would send a robot up to mars just so we could go "hmm, looks like ice, thought it may be salt.... interesting..." *scratches head* "Damn, we should have put some sort of mars-material-identifier-o-matic on board!!"
-
Show 51 - 100 of 168 discussions
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is 