|
Nfidel wrote:Interesting very short story by Arthur C Clarke.The Star
Angels and Spaceships, by Fredric Brown wrote:
Dwar Ev ceremoniously soldered the final connection with gold. The eyes of a dozen television cameras watched him and the subether bore through the universe a dozen pictures of what he was doing.
He straightened and nodded to Dwar Reyn, then moved to a position beside the switch that would complete the contact when he threw it. The switch that would connect, all at once, all of the monster computing machines of all the populated planets in the universe--ninety-six billion planets--into the supercircuit that would connect them all into the one supercalculator, one cybernetics machine that would combine all the knowledge of all the galaxies.
Dwar Reyn spoke briefly to the watching and listening trillions. Then, after a moment's silence, he said, "Now, Dwar Ev."
Dwar Ev threw the switch. There was a mighty hum, the surge of power from ninety-six billion planets. Lights flashed and quieted along the miles-long panel.
Dwar Ev stepped back and drew a deep breath. "The honor of asking the first question is yours, Dwar Reyn."
"Thank you," said Dwar Reyn. "It shall be a question that no single cybernetics machine has been able to answer."
He turned to face the machine. "Is there a God?"
The mighty voice answered without hesitation, without the clicking of single relay.
"Yes, now there is a God."
Sudden fear flashed on the face of Dwar Ev. He leaped to grab the switch.
A bolt of lightning from the cloudless sky struck him down and fused the switch shut.*
BecauseHeLives wrote:If you believe it to be fiction then perhaps you could point out some inaccuracies? That is...if you've actually watched the clips (which I doubt you have). I'd like to hear them.
Try reading what I said, instead of what you imagined I said before you accuse me of being like yourself.BecauseHeLives wrote:The point is this AP... if you won't take time to watch the video then its simply arrogant to point fingers at it and says its fiction. But, I'm used to you keeping a closed mind...
BecauseHeLives wrote:So you blatently ADMIT you didn't check the facts before calling it fiction. Typical. Perhaps you can contact the author and he'll send you his "fact" sheet. Of course how many facts wills be enough for you. I doubt that any will if it goes against your man-centered world view.
A Person wrote:It's also rather interesting to consider what the Bible says about astrology and divination
Deuteronomy 18:10-12
There shall not be found among you any ... that useth divination, or an observer of times.... For all that do these things are an abomination unto the LORD.
Isiah 47:13-14
Let now the astrologers, the stargazers, the monthly prognosticators, stand up, and save thee from these things that shall come upon thee. Behold, they shall be as stubble; the fire shall burn them; they shall not deliver themselves from the power of the flame: there shall not be a coal to warm at, nor fire to sit before it.
Jeronimo 10:2
Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
A Person wrote:Jeronimo 10:2
Thus saith the LORD, Learn not the way of the heathen, and be not dismayed at the signs of heaven; for the heathen are dismayed at them.
BecauseHeLives wrote:Its not astrology doofus. Astrology supposedly controls humanity. Astronomy is bunk. Astronomy is science and can show history. Did I say doofus?
Of all people I would expect you to know the difference.
I'll be generous and assume you meant to say Astrology not astronomy, since that would be a very doofussy thing to say otherwise.Astronomy is bunk. Astronomy is science and can show history.
A Person wrote:It's also rather interesting to consider what the Bible says about astrology and divination
c.1375, from L. astrologia "astronomy," from Gk. astrologia "telling of the stars," from astron "star" + -logia "treating of," comb. form of logon "one who speaks (in a certain manner)." Originally identical with astronomy, it had also a special sense of "practical astronomy, astronomy applied to prediction of events." This was divided into natural astrology "the calculation and foretelling of natural phenomenon" (tides, eclipses, etc.), and judicial astrology "the art of judging occult influences of stars on human affairs" (also known as stromancy, 1652). Differentiation began late 1400s and by 17c. this word was limited to "reading influences of the stars and their effects on human destiny."
Online Etymology Dictionary
ecofox wrote:The whole universe is organized. In a precise exact manner why don't people wonder why?
Survival of light-sensitive species
Within their framework, 50% of all species went extinct at the end of the Cretaceous. This included shallow-water organisms. Yet some of the shallow-water organisms which survived were of a type which require uninterrupted light, thus discounting the ‘Sun blacked out by a dust cloud’ scenario.
Analogous events fail to support
The huge 1883 eruption of Krakatoa, which nearly obliterated an island, was heard over 3,000 miles away. The resultant effects of the ejecta on sunlight dropped the average mid-summer temperature in the US the following year by 7°F, causing widespread crop failure. There was even worse havoc and famine in Europe. Not only was it not followed by any global extinctions, there is evidence of an eruption in the past some 400 times greater than Krakatoa. There are no associated extinctions in the fossil record. Granted, the Alvarez hypothesis postulated something about a thousand times greater than the Krakatoa eruption, but why would there be absolutely no effect at all for something which was 40% as powerful as something which is supposed to have wiped out half the species on Earth?
Yes it is. Most of it is empty, The movements of many of the larger objects are predictable at a macro scale but not at a detailed one.ecofox wrote:The universe is not Chaotic.
Random means that the various possible outcomes are equally probable. You can't just redefine words to suit your purposes. The outcome of rolling a die is random, provided the die is unbiased. It is constrained to certain outcomes i.e. integers between 1 and 6, but each outcome is equally probable, i.e. random. If you are suggesting that given perfect knowledge, perfect information and unlimited time and processing capacity its behaviour could be modelled then perhaps you might be correct, but since we have none of those things and never can, the throw of a die is random and unpredictable. If you disagree then I suggest you play craps at Las Vegas for an introductory course in probabilities.ecofox wrote:There is no such thing as "random".
Random just means beyond human understanding.
Like when we roll dice we say the outcome is random.
However the outcome is actually calculated by physics and determined by the faces on the die.
Not by any competent science or actual evidence. A weak analogy to the effects of a volcanic eruption is not a debunking. The 1883 Krakatoa eruption had an energy estimated at 200 megatons of TNTecofox wrote:The Dino's killed by Meteor Theory has been debunked already.
