Create an Account
username: password:
 
  MemeStreams Logo

Bookmarkopolis

search

Romanpoet
My Blog
My Profile
My Audience
My Sources
Send Me a Message

sponsored links

Romanpoet's topics
Arts
Business
Games
Health and Wellness
Home and Garden
Miscellaneous
Current Events
Recreation
Local Information
Science
Society
Sports
Technology

support us

Get MemeStreams Stuff!


 
"...obviously bright young guys, but a little misguided in where they were focusing their attention."
--Micheal Stanton, spokesperson for a campus-card company.

Study Habits of Creative People
Topic: Miscellaneous 7:32 pm EST, Dec  8, 2004

"We're interested in the habits, rituals and small (and occasionally big) methods people and teams use to get their work done. And in the specific anecdotes and the way people describe their own relationship to their own work. Here's a list of some stories and habits. Not sure it is actually useful for anything. Do any patterns emerge across stories, other than the obvious stories of super-focus, super-dedication?"

Study Habits of Creative People


NNDB
Topic: Technology 3:03 am EST, Dec  8, 2004

Latest from the sinister minds at rotten.com . Has much information on the interconnections of famous people.

NNDB


Hungarian Version of Fleshbot.com
Topic: Recreation 2:16 am EST, Dec  8, 2004

It has a charm.

Hungarian Version of Fleshbot.com


Creation Museum | Walk-through
Topic: Miscellaneous 2:15 am EST, Dec  8, 2004

Crazy cultists are building an anti-science museum in Kentucky. You can take a virtual walkthrough. Some choice quotes:

] Peer back into the deepest recesses of the heavens,
] and discover that the latest images of the stars
] confirm an all powerful Creator, not a random bang!

] The Bible is true. No doubt about it! Paul explains
] God's authoritative Word, and everyone who rejects
] His history-including six-day creation and Noah's
] Flood-is ‘willfully’ ignorant.

] Everywhere you turn, science confirms the biblical account!

] The first man walked with dinosaurs and named them all!

] God’s Word is true, or evolution is true. No millions of
] years. There’s no room for compromise.

] The only way to cover our sin is the horrific death of
] an innocent substitute.

] Mingle with the unsuspecting people of Noah’s day,
] ‘eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage.’
] Why listen to that crazy preacher who warns of coming
] judgment?

Of course, they won't tell you when they plan to open it cause they want to carrot the openning date to raise more money. I'd almost suggest a road trip when it opens but I'm afraid they'd kick me out, or worse, serve koolaid.

Creation Museum | Walk-through


Science of Random'ness
Topic: Science 12:54 pm EST, Dec  6, 2004

This is an issue I've actually thought about for sometime. I eventually came to the conclusion that random'ness doesn't exist unless you just operationally define it in some arbitrary way. [which is what they did on Mathworld anyway]. Defining it in terms of Quantum things is very strange, and I doubt it qualifies as a definition.

Science of Random'ness


3D Go Board Building Instructions
Topic: Recreation 4:14 pm EST, Dec  5, 2004

Probably of interest only to me.

3D Go Board Building Instructions


Scalia opposed to separation of church and state
Topic: Society 1:29 am EST, Dec  5, 2004

] "There is something wrong with the principle of
] neutrality," said Scalia, considered among the court's
] staunchest conservatives. Neutrality as envisioned by the
] founding fathers, Scalia said, "is not neutrality between
] religiousness and nonreligiousness; it is between
] denominations of religion."

Our founding fathers and other great national leaders were brilliant men who developed powerful ideas about how to build a successful society. However, you have to put them in a context. Abraham Lincoln, for example, would be viewed as a contemptible bigot were he alive today, but that does not mean that we should not honor him and the value of his ideas. What Scalia misses is that the society which existed in 1776 is not the same society which exists today, and in fact it was a great deal less mature.

The valuable idea here is that the government should not get involved in the task of dictating religious beliefs or doctrine. However, in the context of the late 1700's all of the white people in America practiced some form of Christianity or Judaism. Other religions were certainly practiced by people who weren't white, but this mattered little in an institutionally racist society. So, in that context, references to God were not understood to fall into the scope of dictating religious doctrine. People were simply not aware of an example of a way of thinking which did not include God.

Today we are much more mature. There are a far wider array of religions acknowledged and practiced in our society, including a growing minority of the population that does not practice any religion at all. In that context the fundamental philosophy of the founders must be applied differently then it would have been applied 200+ years ago. That means building a society which respects religious beliefs but doesn't require them.

Of course, the cynical thought here is that Scalia is far too intelligent to have missed this distinction, or to be unaware of the context in which he lives. Its clear in the quotes taken in this article that he promotes a religious government, and opposes secularism. In doing so, he in fact advocates the establishment of religion, and stands opposed to the fundamental constitutional law that he is tasked with defending.

There is another argument in there, which Scalia does not make, but which must be asked...

Insofaras we can see that philosophically the values inherent in our system of government require protecting rights that the populace, on the whole, doesn't respect, how should we respond? One might argue that the democratic government ought to drive these changes, as if the court out steps the democracy too far its legitimacy is threatened. On the other hand, we don't need to defend popular rights. The whole purpose of limited government is to protect unpopular minorities from the tyranny of the majority. The Constitution, and the court, mean nothing, if we are simply operating on majority rule. How do you strike that balance?

To be honest, the impeachment mechanism provides a safety value through which a court that went too far could be reigned in by the democracy without violence and without threatening the basic institution.

So my answer is, Insofaras we can see that philosophically the values inherent in our system of government require protecting rights that the populace, on the whole, doesn't respect, we should respond by protecting those rights unless we would be impeached for doing so.

Scalia opposed to separation of church and state


Free Credit Reports For All!
Topic: Miscellaneous 1:25 am EST, Dec  5, 2004

Check It! Free annual service now begins for the Western United States. The rest of us will have to wait a while.

Free Credit Reports For All!


Mathematical LEGO Sculptures
Topic: Recreation 12:22 am EST, Dec  2, 2004

Mathematical Objects Rendered in LEGO.
* Klein Bottle
* Mobius Strip
...

Mathematical LEGO Sculptures


SEXual Physix
Topic: Science 6:19 pm EST, Nov 30, 2004

* Sex at the speed of light
* Quantum sexual physics
* It wasn't me... it was the rest of the Universe
* Observing sex at the speed of light
* Ejaculation at the speed of light
* Sex with genital piercings is a matter of electrodynamics
* The wormhole-assisted masturbation technique
... and more!

SEXual Physix


(Last) Newer << 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5 - 6 - 7 >> Older (First)
 
 
Powered By Industrial Memetics
RSS2.0