Nasa scientists find evidence of flowing water on Mars

[Providence]

I have looked into the time one and will look into the rest. Thanks a bunch

You should not just take them at face value. Apply your mind as well. Don't just watch like a dumbo

 

[ZYXW]

You should not just take them at face value. Apply your mind as well. Don't just watch like a dumbo

Nope I will watch like this LOL

 

[VCheng]

Yes they can be judged, because science believes in facts not what you believe in. Therefore, if there is something that contradicts science, what'll you do?

Nothing needs to be done if there is such a contradiction since the frames of reference are so different and mutually exclusive between religion and science. The twain shall never meet. Ever.

 

[Providence]

Yes they can be judged, because science believes in facts not what you believe in. Therefore, if there is something that contradicts science, what'll you do?

In that case the scientific theory is disproved and new theory takes shape. Science knows it is not true always and cannot be. Hence, it believes in empirical evidence to accept a new theory.

 

[sanddy]

That's great Scientists have found water and ice on Mars...we just need to carry whiskey and chips...can't depend on scientists for every thing..

 

[Providence]

That's great Scientists have found water and ice on Mars...we just need to carry whiskey and chips...can't depend on scientists for every thing..

Just wait and watch the race to the red planet heat up in say just 10 years.

 

[Donatello]

Nothing needs to be done if there is such a contradiction since the frames of reference are so different and mutually exclusive between religion and science. The twain shall never meet. Ever.

Yes it will. There is a reason vast majority of scientists don't bother to adhere to any religion. Is it surprising that extremely religious nations or those steeped in religious thought have failed to produce science of any repute?

Point being, religion might claim adam and eve and that earth was created in a jiffy and bla bla. We know earth is not 5000 years old, so what you are saying is that the religion claim of the universe being just thousands of years old is parallel to what science says is billions of years old? That cannot happen.

frames of reference work well when you are dealing with Einstein's work. Not biblical verses.

If i go out wearing a red T-shirt and it rains, i know i will get wet.
I go out the next day wearing the same T-shirt, and it rains, does it mean that every time i wear a red T-shirt it will rain on me? Nope. I can 'believe' in int all i want in whatever reference frame, still doesn't change the 'fact' that me wearing something has zero probable chance of a rain happening.

 

[VCheng]

Yes it will. There is a reason vast majority of scientists don't bother to adhere to any religion. Is it surprising that extremely religious nations or those steeped in religious thought have failed to produce science of any repute?

Point being, religion might claim adam and eve and that earth was created in a jiffy and bla bla. We know earth is not 5000 years old, so what you are saying is that the religion claim of the universe being just thousands of years old is parallel to what science says is billions of years old? That cannot happen.

frames of reference work well when you are dealing with Einstein's work. Not biblical verses.

If i go out wearing a red T-shirt and it rains, i know i will get wet.
I go out the next day wearing the same T-shirt, and it rains, does it mean that every time i wear a red T-shirt it will rain on me? Nope. I can 'believe' in int all i want in whatever reference frame, still doesn't change the 'fact' that me wearing something has zero probable chance of a rain happening.

I am not the type to shy away from a good discussion, but knowing that religious discussion are against the rules of PDF, and since I am under a microscope already, I must bow out of this thread for now, Sir, regrettably.

 

[Gauss]

Just looked it up on wikipedia....I've studied many of the concepts in the book (I know binary search algorithms, different sorting algorithms, data structures, trees; studied different types of trees, don't remember their names)...

But what does that have to do with the fact that I think robots ARE advanced enough ?

then you will know that robots do everything algorithmicly. the algorithms for industrial robots are far simpler. a robotic arm drilling some holes in a sheet of metal or painting a car runs a simple algorithm. on the other hand an algorithms for growing a plant will be far more complex. infact with todays tech its prohibitively complex. otherwise we wont need farmers, we will just leave the growing of crops to robots.

 

[Faiez]

then you will know that robots do everything algorithmicly. the algorithms for industrial robots are far simpler. a robotic arm drilling some holes in a sheet of metal or painting a car runs a simple algorithm. on the other hand an algorithms for growing a plant will be far more complex. infact with todays tech its prohibitively complex. otherwise we wont need farmers, we will just leave the growing of crops to robots.

Read any book with the title Intro to Artificial Intelligence.

And robots can/are growing plants entirely on their own. Infact that's a very simple thing to do.

We know earth is not 5000 years old

Yeah, it's 6,000 years old. Atleast get your facts right stupid....

I am not the type to shy away from a good discussion, but knowing that religious discussion are against the rules of PDF, and since I am under a microscope already, I must bow out of this thread for now, Sir, regrettably.

It takes a REAL MAN to become a keyboard warrior. You simply don't have what it takes.

 

[Gauss]

And robots can/are growing plants entirely on their own. Infact that's a very simple thing to do.

Man deals with say 1000 variables. robot only deals with 100. thats the difference. as yet robots cant operate in the environment of a man. we reduce variables for them. then they work without mistakes.

 

[Faiez]

Man deals with say 1000 variables. robot only deals with 100. thats the difference. as yet robots cant operate in the environment of a man. we reduce variables for them. then they work without mistakes.

Robots deal with 1000s of variables too...

I'm telling you programming is very powerful now....

Are you like 1st or 2nd year engineering student ?

 

[Gauss]

Robots deal with 1000s of variables too...

I'm telling you programming is very powerful now....

Are you like 1st or 2nd year engineering student ?

i want to end this conversation. thank you.

 

[Faiez]

i want to end this conversation. thank you.

"The quality of a leader is reflected in the standards they set for themselves."

 

[Gauss]

"The quality of a leader is reflected in the standards they set for themselves."

ok.