Sayonara

It seems like it. And all of the various branches of the evolutionary sciences are Darwinism.

My answer is "one, if there were still any around since screw lightbulbs were invented." Not as mildly amusing, I know.

Whoops. Half of post number 7 should be under post #13. Warning to moderators using Firefox: the Ajax inline post functions don't like the back button.

If you are stating that evolutionary science presents fiction as fact, and doing so on a science forum, then it follows that you should have a compelling body of evidence to back up your claim. Where is it? It is not the aim or the job of "science" to threaten your beliefs, so any conditions of threat that you think are in effect are very much your own contrivance. If your faith in whatever doctrine you follow is not flexible enough to accomodate other sources of information, then perhaps it's that which you should question, and not arbitrarily selected things that don't fall into its scope.

Let's not kid ourselves. A lot of the people in the general public who "accept" evolution do so in a hand-waving "don't bother me with your magic while I'm making dinner" sort of way that suggests they know of it, but not what it does or who sells it.

This is not the "let's bash Herme3" thread.

This is clearly off-topic.

...which is a net gain of zero matter, because you're already accepting dimensional conditions that allow transposition of matter. The only way the 2nd law can stop time travel is if it's a form of time travel that you have contrived to show that the 2nd law stops it, which is a fairly pointless application. We've done this thread several times before.

That's only because we don't know of any party planets.

Unless you go to a planet that is just right for your requirements. "Earth is boring" and "I cannot be satisfied" are different propositions.

Build an interstellar ship. That'll keep you occupied, and give you the opportunity to find somewhere more fun.

lol, kudos

Guilty, for networking purposes. I refuse to use their alleged "blog". http://www.myspace.com/starfedrogue

That which relates to the science of computing, which reading server logs is not. Ahhh right, that was not clear (probably because I scanned ). It is possible that people are visiting more frequently with Firefox because it has much better tools for blocking marketing content. But still an interesting rise nonetheless. Because the traffic does not simply go Client<-->Your server. It passes through a good dozen nodes on the way, and the headers are public.

This was moved by a moderator because it is not computer science. Herme3, you must be careful not to fall into the trap of believing that client stats from one site are representative of web-wide trends. Different sites attract different kinds of users depending on the content, so for instance a site that deals mainly with computers and coding is likely to attract a disproportionately large number of people with non-IE browsers. There are companies out there that produce browser usage stats that more accurately reflect current trends. It's interesting to follow.

What case?

The thing is, "time paradoxes" are not time paradoxes at all. They are human reasoning paradoxes, and without the ability to test them we have no idea how the universe would deal with such scenarios.

You will have to re-post your sample without images that evade the word censor.

PMing you the login details now...

He denies the holocaust yet has pledged to complete it? What a loon. Now I am a bit worried.

Nothing - it's hosted on my reseller account so you won't need to worry about cash. As long as the fundamental principle of attacking the methods of creationism and not the beliefs is adhered to, you can do what you like with the place

"Using more words" was the goal. Simply stating "if... then..." doesn't let us know what's going on in your head It may seem like a no-brainer that Iran might want nuclear weapons, but that doesn't mean they will risk building them.

That's not really adding anything to the discussion, is it? "Economics" and "pride" are both far more likely than "want to make themselves the West's next big target."

If you were Iran, would you want your heavily-invested atomic energy industry to be effectively controlled by Russia through fuel supply?

Something is thickening.