=== jjesse__ is now known as jjesse [11:31] morning [11:37] http://www.clickondetroit.com/video/28876290/index.html wife made the news with a flash of the little techie [11:37] and morning [11:40] Good morning, Ubuntites. [11:40] party [11:42] Hey, brousch [11:42] Thanks for the approval :) [11:43] heh, no problem. i must have been the first one awake this morning [11:47] Learning Rails 3 pre-release on O'R DotD [11:47] Wolfger: pass [11:47] rick_h_: congrats on being married to a TV star :-) [11:48] Wolfger: heh [11:48] Bugger, I missed that last night [11:49] I went to bed [11:49] but saw it this morning [11:49] she did good in it, a little bit of the willow tree waving effect going on [11:49] but good [11:49] willow tree waving? [11:49] http://www.clickondetroit.com/health/28873714/detail.html ? [11:49] shen she talks she waves back/forth [11:50] yea, that's the link she sent me this morning for it [11:52] Yeah, you can tell she's a little nervous [11:52] Love their edits [11:53] You can tell she was talking much more than they used [11:53] yea [11:53] that's tv news spots I'd imagine [11:54] film lots, edit down to "the good stuff" [11:54] Wolfger: You mean the soundbites. [11:55] which is why it's dangerous for any fringe group to ever do a tv interview.... because "the good stuff" to the network is usually "what makes you sound batshit crazy" [11:55] "I... think it's OK... to vaccinate... children" [11:56] Every TV program is a narrative. The editing room makes things fit that narrative. [11:57] well, yea they have to make it scary "OMG your kid might be missing stuff...and die!" [11:57] at least the part about me having the whooping cough got cut out [11:57] of course. [11:57] Grateful they didn't put in that you had whooping cough [11:57] strategic edit. ;) [11:58] yea, but makes for a great "See, even this Dr's moronic husband can fall prey to this crap" [11:59] rick_h_: Not moronic... you just happen to be a magnet for this stuff. [12:00] bbl [12:02] hehe [12:19] Duolos: where are you located? [12:19] Grand Rapids [12:20] Not a lot of meetings out this way :-/ [12:20] um, you're kidding right? [12:20] weekly linux social [12:20] tomorrow night [12:20] I didn't see anything on the official page. [12:20] Guess I didn't look hard enough :) [12:21] ah, no ubuntu meetings, but plenty of linux [12:21] I see a lot of meetings for detroit. [12:21] ahhh [12:21] tomorrow night 7-10 in jenison, beer if you want it [12:22] Honestly, I haven't looked into it too much. I'd love to get together with other linux users, but would feel a bit out of place since they usually seem to be developers and I'm not. [12:22] Well, I'd love to, but I work 3rd shift. [12:22] doh [12:22] well sign up for the GRLUG mailing list to get announcements and such [12:22] Where would I go to keep up with when those meetings are happening? [12:22] Nevermind :) [12:22] alright, I'll find it [12:22] http://grlug.org/mailman/listinfo/grlug [12:23] There's a big geek conference coming up this weekend, BarCampGR [12:23] friday evening and saturday, 30 minute talks on whatever people want to talk about [12:23] Hmm... the main GRLUG page redirects to a broken link; just in case you know the admin [12:23] Duolos: yeah, i just saw that [12:24] the grlug web page is a ghetto [12:24] the mailing list is active though [12:24] Alright. Just signed up for it. [12:24] i may tackle it after i revamp the gr python page [12:24] Thanks [12:25] heh... I'm continually disappointed in websites for so-called "tech-savvy" people [12:25] well to make it purty you need a designer [12:25] Yeah, I s'pose [12:26] so you're an admin? [12:26] Noooo. Just a desktop user. [12:26] Unless you consider providing unlimited tech support for anyone that hears I "know computers" an admin [12:26] hah [12:27] that's how it starts ;) [12:27] Oh, I know it. Do it for free once and suddenly you're locked into it for life. [12:28] There are a ton of tech meetings in grand rapids, unfortunately most of them are from 6PM - 9PM on week days [12:28] http://conga-wm.org/group-list/ [12:29] Oh, wow. Yeah, I didn't think there'd be that much interest. [12:29] I do miss the days of BBS get together's, though, and have been itching to get back into that kind of community. [12:32] Anyway, thank you for the info! [12:33] np [12:33] hope to see you at one of the meetings [12:34] even if you just drop by for a few minutes, stop in to say hi [12:34] I'll try to plan on it whenever I get the time off. [12:34] Is there like a secret handshake so I know I introduce myself to the right group of people? :) [12:34] hah [12:34] no, just find me [12:35] or jump in to any conversation [12:35] So walk in and announce that I'm looking for Broush. Got it :) [12:36] I'll think of some way to get there soon. I assume you're in GR too, then? [12:36] right [12:37] alright, then. Hopefully I'll run into you soon. [13:09] rick_h_: in your woodworking ever run into a tool that required 20amps? === jjesse_ is now known as jjesse [13:15] nullspace: sure, all the time [13:16] my table saw on startup can blow a 20amp breaker [13:16] had to go to 40 [13:17] snap-l: escalate issue with luanchpad??/ this is open source... you don't get to escalate. [13:17] or... go buy commercial support from canonical [13:19] brousch: zomg, you have 3 boys??? [13:19] jrwren: only 1 that i know of [13:19] lol, oh. [13:20] oh it was rick_h_'s dr. wife on the news, not your wife with the kids. [13:20] man... vaccines are a scam. [13:21] vaccines don't actually do what they say. they are actually docility drugs adn infertility drugs that the aliens controlling our government urge us to take. [13:21] [13:21] lol. [13:21] is that why the birthrate is falling and sales of Yanni's music are at an all-time high? [13:22] jrwren: you'd be suprised how often my wife hears that [13:22] nothing breaks a dr's heart like seeing a little guy with parents that refuse to get the shots [13:22] woah woah woah, Yanni sales are at an all time high? [13:22] rick_h_: I call it natural selection [13:23] i wish my wife had the balls to refuse the shots. [13:23] Hmm I thought autism has been traced directly to vaccines. [13:23] Duolos: nope, that was all lies. [13:23] Duolos: NO [13:23] In fact, it has been. [13:23] Duolos: no, it hasn't. [13:23] and again NO [13:23] Lies? In medical journals? [13:23] lol NEVER [13:23] believe it [13:23] Duolos: Jenny McCarthy is just a nutter. [13:23] I... don't know anything about jenny McCarthy [13:23] unless you have a stats degree you can't believe anything in a medical journal [13:23] Duolos: that's call quack science, studies take years to produce viable results [13:23] welcome to the world of "must get published to show I did work/keep job" [13:24] Duolos: she was a huge proponent that vaccines cause autism. there is NO scientific evidence of this. [13:24] casusation, correlation, etc [13:24] * jrwren moves into serious mode. [13:24] jrwren: oh dear [13:24] Did I stumble into #liberalism? ;) [13:24] yea, don't perpetrate the urban myth please [13:24] huh? certainly not. [13:24] but again: there is no evidence. [13:24] Duolos: no you stumbled in a room full of science nerds [13:24] no, you stumbled upon people that watch the news and don't actually think about what they're told [13:24] well, the oposite of that [13:25] eh... can't believe much of what's on the news anymore. [13:25] wow i look away from this channel and it goes all crazy :P [13:25] yeah, one of whom is married to a Dr.... the other of whom is married to a phd abt human geneticist who went to med school :) [13:25] jjesse: rawr! [13:25] I miss the days when anchors told the news instead of interpreting it for us [13:25] then treat any medical journal article the same one [13:25] /one/way [13:25] jrwren: I find that a lot of doctors and "experts" don't have a clue what they're talking about :) [13:25] it's all about how the study was done, what the actual results show, [13:25] don't beleive ANYTHING on the news... if there was a new agency or a politician involves, its 99% lies. [13:26] i just believe what i read on the itnernet [13:26] lol, that's perfectly safe [13:26] :P [13:26] i only believe jon stewart [13:26] rick_h_: Right. Like evolution. There haven't been any studies because there CAN'T be and we can't produce results... [13:26] :P [13:26] Duolos: agreed 100%. doctors are just as dumb and incompetent as any other group of people. [13:26] that and what steven colbert tells me [13:26] jrwren: amen! [13:26] jrwren: and biased... they'll distort anything until they're right. [13:26] "there haven't been any studies" <-- is false. [13:27] working at a medical school will shatter any notions of the mightly dr [13:27] evolution has been studied since Darwin [13:27] jrwren: no no no. No one has every studied evolution. Because it happens to slowly to watch. [13:27] rick_h_: yup! or going out drinking with med students :) [13:27] Duolos: jrwren is still on vaccines [13:27] i am? [13:27] Duolos: i disagree. [13:27] rick_h_: going to the court house adn watching a medical malpractiice suit will do the same thing [13:27] oh, figured you were :) [13:27] jrwren: Just saying that taking a conclusion and then finding evidence to support it is the OPPOSITE of the scientific method. [13:28] jrwren: And you're wrong :P [13:28] Duolos: no one has EXPERIMENTED with evolution... but STUDYING is what we ahve been doing since darwin. [13:28] to say no one has studied evolution is a very ignorant statement. [13:28] ok that's enough trolling [13:29] jrwren: again, ya can't study something that happens too slowly to watch. You can study your IDEAS or BELIEFS about what is happening, that's all. [13:29] But I digress [13:29] :P yay linux and stuff! [13:30] I just think it's funny that "scientists" will find one bone and tell us all about how early human ancestors raised their children. :P [13:30] yay for hyperbole! [13:30] what about viruses? they evolve all the time [13:30] Duolos: you are wrong. [13:30] Duolos: you can study ANYTHING. [13:30] brousch: from one form to another, not one species to another [13:31] jrwren: I guess that all just comes down to how you define "study." Maybe I'm using the wrong word for it, true. [13:31] you seem to be. [13:31] lab mice have evolved to their own species. [13:31] being unable to observe evolution != being unable to study it [13:32] jrwren: ??? citation? [13:32] jrwren: yeah... I didn't know there was a species known as "lab mouse" [13:33] http://www.nus.edu.sg/iacuc/files/The%20Laboratory%20Mouse.pdf [13:34] jrwren: on which page does it describe how it evolved from a different species? [13:34] It's a little too long for a quick read through [13:34] tl dr [13:34] Oh, wait. First sentence says it was "derived from the common house mouse." So... it was still a mouse before. Got it. [13:35] grr. Something in the work firewall is mucking with that PDF. I'll have to read it later [13:35] Duolos: that's how evolution works [13:35] That was selective breeding and adaptation, not evolution. [13:35] you don't get mice from snails... [13:35] now you are redefining evolution. [13:35] No... actually, I wasn't defining evolution at all [13:36] new species don't just pop out of nothing they evolve, change from another species [13:36] you are eliminating selective breeding adn adaptation from its definition. [13:36] I was pointing out that the article you posted talks about selective breeding and adaptation, not evolution. [13:36] those two things are inherent in evolution [13:36] throw in some mutation and there isn't much left to evolution [13:36] Except that "selective" suggests a "selector" of which evolution has none (by definition) [13:37] the ecosystem is the selector [13:37] oh wait. natural selection. right. [13:37] And good morning again. [13:37] Evolution: (Biology) change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift. [13:37] haha [13:37] the conditions in the environment [13:38] Wolfger: I get that. I was referring to "macroevolution," everything from nothing. [13:38] conservation of mass... you can't get anything from nothing :-) [13:38] it's just evolution over a long time scale [13:38] Wolfger: exactly. [13:38] nobody's every said that you do [13:38] But everything must have a beginning. [13:39] Wolfger: nobody's EVER said that? [13:39] what's your beginning? [13:39] everything must have a beginning? How do you figure that? [13:39] haha [13:39] Wolfger: physics [13:39] in fact, everything is always changing [13:39] Energy, for example, can never be created or destroyed. [13:40] Same with mass. [13:40] err matter [13:40] sure it can, its created in chemical and nuclear reactions [13:40] Please define energy [13:40] lol [13:40] I see no proof for the statement that "everything must have a beginning", and you seem to be grabbing things out of thin air to argue against.... [13:40] snap-l: uhm... lemme google it for you lol [13:40] careful, I see snapl getting jodee involved here in a sec [13:41] snap-l: The strength and vitality required for sustained physical or mental activity. [13:41] Oh yes, yes it will happen [13:41] No, it's the ability for something to do work [13:41] brousch: the energy isn't created in those instances... it just changes forms. [13:41] Duolos: man, you cause a lot of commotion for your first day lol [13:42] snap-l: Email Google and tell them they lied ;) [13:42] rick_h_: I walked in on a controversial topic and boom, I'm in :P [13:42] I think you're looking at the Merriam Webster definition [13:42] which isn't correct for a physics debate. :) [13:42] snap-l: okay, email them then [13:42] Oh good grief, I just googled for a quick definition because you didn't know what "energy" meant lol if you already knew, don't ask [13:42] oh geeze [13:43] the big bang is the current leading theory for the beginning of everything. 13 billion years is a long time. long enough to go from an explosion to people [13:43] Well, I wanted everyone to be clear on the term Energy before using it [13:43] brousch: but still, something must have existed in order for it to explode. so that still isn't the beginning... unless all the matter just always...was. [13:43] physicists get very irritated when people use energy as a synonym for other things. [13:44] ie: quantum energy [13:44] Duolos: there are some things that scientists do not have an answer for yet. that's what makes it so interesting [13:44] snap-l: I was using energy more along the lines of Newton's laws [13:44] Duolos: You might want to update your understanding of physics, then. :) [13:44] An object in motion, an object at rest, etc. Stuff I can't forget from junior high :) [13:45] Quantum / Relativity are fun. :) [13:45] snap-l: oh, you mean the physical laws of the universe have changed in the past 15 years? Or our understanding of them? [13:45] heh. Appropos for the current mood of the channel: http://shirt.woot.com/shirts/shirts/university-wikipedius [13:45] Yeah... not gonna put all my faith and belief in some "smart guys" that change their minds every year :P [13:46] who else is there? [13:46] Please read up on General Relativity and Quantum prior to engaging in debates on Evolution. [13:46] Wolfger: lmao [13:46] Wolfger: seems unavailable to me. [13:46] Duolos: you'd rather put your faith in dumb guys who never acknowledge new information? [13:46] Newtonian physics is good as a broad brush for everyday activities, but it doesn't explain the cosmos, nor atomic phenomenon [13:46] Wolfger: New information that will be wrong the next time a science article is published? [13:47] ok, that link appears to not exist yet. Until the end of the day: http://shirt.woot.com/ [13:47] that's how you build a correct model, by looking at the evidence as it comes in and debating what it means [13:47] Duolos: you fail to grasp how science works [13:47] and having the flexibility of though and belief to admit you were wrong [13:47] I'm not claiming to have all the answers at all, but I also don't want to say "evolution is an indisputable fact" when there's so little evidence to support it (and that evidence changes constantly) [13:48] Duolos: I think you need to understand what evidence and proof mean. :) [13:48] Evidence is not "shit that some guy made up" [13:48] brousch: Right, I get that. The problem with most evolutionist scientists is that they interpret evidence against their conclusions, not the other way around. They'll never change their conclusion regardless of what evidence shows. [13:48] Proof is not "conjecture some guy threw out there" [13:49] Evidence is observation with careful study, and repeatable results [13:49] So they change how they view the evidence. [13:49] No, they understand the evidence more with repeatable results [13:49] snap-l: I know what real science is and how the scientific method should be employed. However, in the field of evolutionary science, they don't follow that method. [13:49] If I give you a phone, having never seen a phone before, and it rings, you'd tell me a phone is a device that makes sound [13:50] rick_h_: what kinda table saw do you have? [13:50] But, if I give someone else a phone, and they hit the button to pick up the call when it rings, they would say that it is a communication device [13:50] snap-l: Right... and if I hand you a bone, you'll tell me the original owner's daughter listened to Coldplay. [13:50] Duolos: Where do you find fault with Evolutionary science? [13:50] you can tell a lot from a bone [13:51] nullspace: cheap delta 10" [13:51] brousch: Oh, I'm sure you can. But that's not an exaggeration of some of the crap I've read in scientific journals lol [13:51] sometimes what the animal ate, how old it was, where it lived [13:51] when I run it on 110 it pushed the 20a breaker [13:51] brousch: ...what it was thinking when it died? [13:51] should be better on 220, but I haven't run any of that to the garage yet [13:51] no [13:51] You can guess; you can't know. [13:52] Duolos: No, that's Psychics, not Physics. And Psychics is crap. ;) [13:52] it's all educated guesses [13:52] snap-l: I have an issue with the way that most scientists go about interpreting the things they see. [13:52] Duolos: Example, please? [13:52] well when you spend your life looking at the same sorts of things, you can get a pretty good idea of how a new one fits in [13:53] there are car guys that can see the edge of a bumper on a car and know what make, model, and year it is [13:53] snap-l: Well, for example, and if you need the source it will take me a while to find it (read it several months ago)... scientists found a part of a hand bone and said that it indicated that early humans "may" have been more loving parents than originally thought [13:54] Their reasoning? They found other bones nearby that were from a child, apparently. [13:54] that sounds silly on the surface. did you read the whole article? [13:54] There's also an entire field devoted to "evolutionary psychology" [13:54] brousch: yeah, I did [13:54] brousch: they used the words "may," "could," and "might" a lot :) [13:55] also is it really fair to throw out all of evolution because one scientist is extrapolating too much? [13:55] brousch: He asked for AN example, not all of them [13:56] How about the recent discovery that some species of frogs are growing teeth again. Just like their ancient ancestors before evolution chose the teeth for removal? [13:56] Duolos: Have you heard of archaeology? [13:56] Sorry, I don't remember the name of the evolutionary law, but it basically states that once genetic information has been removed, it can not be added back. [13:56] that's silly [13:56] These frogs are a direct contradiction of that law and the scientists called the frogs "the exception." [13:57] Duolos: Please give us the source. Right now you're just spouting conjecture. [13:57] agreed [13:57] snap-l: Right now, you ASSUME I'm just spouting conjecture. [13:57] Give me a moment, I'll find the source for the frogs. [13:57] And you assume I'm not a tomato with conciousness [13:58] now I'm agreeing with Duolos [13:58] so i "believe" in evolution because i think it's the current best explanation for what we see today. it hasn't explained everything, but it explains more than any other theory. when something more comprehensive comes along, i'll gladly "believe" it [13:58] snap-l: Is National Geographic a credible source in your eyes? [13:58] It'll do in a pinch [13:58] I need to ask before sourcing them because I know how people think when something challenges their beliefs lol [13:58] http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2011/02/110209-frogs-teeth-evolution-science/ [13:58] evolution is bullshit. anunaki has been influencing our planet for mililions of years. [13:58] terraforming it. [13:58] not only did anunaki create man, but anunaki created EARTH! [13:59] oh man, nationalgeographic set off my murdoch block [13:59] hahaha [13:59] how about the BBC? They reported on it too [13:59] http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_9365000/9365076.stm [14:00] just because you don't believe in a fact, doesn't mean that fact isn't still true. [14:00] Duolos: So, your point is that they found a "loophole" in what was previously considered a law? [14:00] Anyway, there are two examples [14:00] jrwren: wait, which "fact" do I not believe in? [14:00] evolution doesn't need you to believe in it. [14:00] Duolos: Congratulations, you're watching science in progress. [14:00] Duolos: that wasn't directed at you :) [14:01] jrwren: oh, sorry. Figured I was ganged up on :) [14:01] Duolos: but the fact I'm thinking of... was... my lord adn savior, the prince of light. :p [14:01] Duolos: remember when they found the duckbilled platypus? [14:01] of course not.. he is too young for that. [14:01] snap-l: That's my point, though. You can't trust anything they claim is fact because in a year or two, it won't be. [14:01] snap-l the old man :) [14:01] Previously unassailable laws that mammals don't have feathers were put to the test. [14:01] And yes, plenty of evolutionists claim it is irrefutable fact. [14:02] Duolos: I think you're mildly mistaken [14:02] snap-l: on? [14:02] anyone who thinks they understand all of evolution is a fool [14:02] ignore them and find smarter people [14:02] evolutionists can't be painted with such broad strokes much in the same way that Christianity can't be painted with broad strokes. [14:02] brousch: I don't know. Richard Dawkins is a very smart guy... [14:02] I cannot recall hearing any evolutionist saying that anything is irrefutable fact. [14:03] zomg. [14:03] Wolfger: Dawkins. Hawking. [14:03] i hate richard dawkins. [14:03] and that's an irrefutable fact. [14:03] he is a fucking asshole. world would be better off without him. [14:03] i'm glad southpark tore him a new one. [14:03] some Chris guy... can't remember his last name. Hitchenson, maybe? [14:03] Duolos: ok, you're on. Show me where they said it. [14:03] So Dawkins is the spokesperson for Evoution, then? [14:04] oh good grief [14:04] I'm serious [14:04] this is why it's impossible to debate liberals lol [14:04] omg, the subtitle of your article is "Mysterious re-evolution challenges evolutionary theory, scientists say." [14:04] well, yes... I think dawkins is a self-claiming spokes person for evolution. [14:04] THEORY [14:04] That's like saying that Jimmy Swaggart is the spokesperson for Christianity. [14:04] not fact [14:04] Did I say he was the spokesperson? Nope. Did I say that the frog story was absolute proof against evolution? Nope. [14:04] Duolos: WE'll debate anytime you're ready. :) [14:04] wtf does liberals have to do with anything? I have a very conservative view of science. [14:04] But you'll just twist everything I say [14:05] I'm not twisting it, I'm saying that you're cherrypicking. [14:05] snap-l: You're officially out lol [14:05] Wolfger: theories can be facts. see the theory of gravity. [14:05] [14:05] * ColonelPanic001 is a supporter of Intelligent Falling. [14:05] Dawkins is an arrogant prick, but so am I, so I don't mind. [14:05] jrwren: Gravity isn't a fact. We don't know there isn't SOMEWHERE that gravity isn't present :P [14:06] Duolos: Would it make you happier if someone said that Evolution is a body of scientific work in progress? [14:06] jrwren: it's a "theory" because we don't understand exactly how it works [14:06] and that it's the prevailing scientific thought? [14:07] Duolos: zomg, that is the dumbest thign I've ever read. [14:07] nah, I've said dumber, I'm sure. [14:07] jrwren: uhm... you should read more? [14:07] I love the way Duolos points to an article showing that a species has evolved in an unexpected way as an argument against believing in evolution.... [14:07] Duolos: truth. [14:08] Wolfger: Well, you know, once you poke a hole in science, it flutters around the room expelling everything until it's just a limp shard of it's former self [14:08] imma throw you off a 20 story building... then we'll see if you think gravity is fact... or if you think at all.. MUHUWHAHAHAHAH j/k of course. [14:08] Wolfger: bloody hell, man. I was asked to show an article that is just one example of why I don't TRUST evolution or scientists. [14:08] then we can have our hovercars [14:08] you don't poke a hole in science by finding something unexpected, that *is* science. [14:08] ColonelPanic001: tada! you with the right prize. [14:08] wait [14:09] why I don't trust everything scientists tell me is true. [14:09] * ColonelPanic001 wins. We can all go home now [14:09] nothing wrong with that [14:09] you shouldn't [14:09] i'm going home right now. [14:09] Have to clarify or suddenly I'll be pegged as believing the earth is flat [14:09]