Can Christian Electronic Designers Design?
in [Design]
|
From: Bill Sloman on 1 Apr 2010 18:06 On Apr 1, 5:15 pm, John Larkin <jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 01:17:30 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > > > <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >On Mar 31, 2:13 pm, Archimedes' Lever <OneBigLe...(a)InfiniteSeries.Org> > >wrote: > >> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 00:38:36 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >On Mar 31, 1:47 am, John Larkin > >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 15:06:12 -0700 (PDT),Bill Sloman > > >> >> <bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >> >> >On Mar 30, 4:12 pm, John Larkin > >> >> ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On Tue, 30 Mar 2010 14:40:43 +1100, "David L. Jones" > > >> >> >> <altz...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> >D from BC wrote: > >> >> >> >> mmm sseems a little quiet in SED so... > >> >> >> >> Time for another mega-troll. > > >> >> >> >> Are Christian beliefs in conflict with good electronics engineering? > > >> >> >> >There appears to be no evidence that delusion and electronics design ability > >> >> >> >are mutually exclusive. > > >> >> >> >Dave. > > >> >> >> Not as long as you're happy spinning the pcb etch four or five times, > >> >> >> and shipping a lot of bugs. To get it right the first time, you can't > >> >> >> lie to yourself about anything. > > >> >> >Your opinions about the way the genetic system might work did imply > >> >> >that you were deceiving yourself pretty thorooughly in that area. > > >> >> Genetic science is, if anything, trending in the directions I > >> >> expected. DNA and its supporting systems is indeed a very > >> >> sophisticated, nearly intelligent machine, hardly a > >> >> random-mutation+selection process. Evolution guarantees that it be so. > > >> >And you still don't get it. DNA doesn't know anything about itself, > >> >merely whether the phoneme it has produced is good enough to survive > >> >and reproduce. All the "sophistication" involves differernt ways of > >> >doing the random mutation process - in big gene-duplicating chunks > >> >versus single nuclear polymorphisms. > > >> >This is about as far from "intelligent" as one can get. > > >> Nice guesses, > > >Have your read any of the recent papers on the subject? You might try > >to plow through "Modularity" ISBN 0-226-73855-8. It was published in > >2004, but the stuff coming out in the current "Proceedings of the > >National Academy of Science" still seems to fit the same set of ideas. > > >> but there is no conclusive proof for your claim either, > > >Or so you'd like to think. > > >> yet you tout it and yourself as being the only viable "observation", > > >I do seem to know more about the subject than you or John Larkin - > >which isn't much - but if either of you took the trouble to listen > >somebody who has studied the subject at a respectable university (as > >John Larkin claims that one of his kids has done) you could get an > >even better informed opinion. > > My older daughter is a biology professor at University of the Pacific. > She has her own office (with a window!) and her own 1200 square foot > lab full of gene sequencers and stuff like that. And assistants to do > the wet stuff. I discuss this stuff with her now and then, and she is > finally starting to admit that I might not be crazy. Which is another way of saying that she has decided that you are terminally ineductable on the subject, and she doesn't want to cut her kids off from their grandfather. > She also has two kids and five motorcycles. Five motorcycles? Are any of them "classics"? -- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
From: RogerN on 1 Apr 2010 18:28 "D from BC" <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote in message news:MPG.261e72bf2a5dc3c6989743(a)209.197.12.12... > In article <c1a9r5h1cmfjptvm4ccgqhvhq0c59jlpb5(a)4ax.com>, > jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... >> >> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:59:12 -0700, D from BC >> <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >> >> >In article <e82dnbi9zKkHYy7WnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, >> >regor(a)midwest.net says... >> >> >> >> "D from BC" <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote in message >> >> news:MPG.261c26f5d5a8546d989733(a)209.197.12.12... >> >> > Roger... >> >> > Larkin has faith in God but wrote recently that he makes no claim >> >> > that >> >> > God exists. >> >> > Does he believe in God or not? >> >> > Is he just wishing for a God? Or is his believing in God/Jesus for a >> >> > ticket to heaven. >> >> > >> >> >> >> He seemed pretty clear on it but you seem to have muddied up what he >> >> wrote. >> > >> >Larkin posted that there are very intelligent engineers and >> >mathematicians that are Christian. >> >This is a defense for Christianity. >> >> Your logic could equally become a defense of alcoholism. Some great >> electronic designers were alcoholics. >> >> >Then Larkin posts that he made no claim that God exists. >> >> Cite a post where I made a solid claim one way or the other. >> >> >He might still believe in God or have faith in God. >> >> If I did, it would trash your argument that Christians can't be good >> electronic designers. > > 'If I did' ... If I'm understanding your response correctly... > This means you have no belief in God and no faith in God. > Then you are atheist. > Larkin is an atheist. > Correct? > >> >> The only solid data point you can reference in this regard is >> yourself: you're not a Christian and you suck at electronics. >> >> John > > If it is incorrect that you are an atheist, then you are still dodging > naming your religion. > If it is correct you are an atheist, then imo you are deliberately not > effective at being clear about being an atheist. > An example of being clear is 'I'm an atheist'. > Using your attitude, I would expect you to write 'I'm an atheist you > idiot.' > > I dare you post what you are in the form 'I Larkin am a ____________.' > Fill the blank with atheist, agnostic Christian, Jewish, other... > > > -- > D from BC > British Columbia What about agnostic? You demonstrate that you have faith that their is no God by taking the position of Atheist instead of agnostic. Atheism requires faith, believing in God requires faith, agnostic doesn't, it's that simple, I believe there is a God, I am absolutely positive by faith that there is no God (Atheism), or I don't know. Of the bunch, the Atheist is definitely the stupidest, and that is the group that you place yourself in. RogerN
From: RogerN on 1 Apr 2010 18:34 "D from BC" <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote in message news:MPG.261e7fcd6ea05860989744(a)209.197.12.12... > In article <a4l9r55c932agh44aqbbgar5jhgl9ta3gv(a)4ax.com>, > jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... >> >> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:07:51 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >> wrote: >> >> >In article <c1a9r5h1cmfjptvm4ccgqhvhq0c59jlpb5(a)4ax.com>, >> >jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... >> >> >> >> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:59:12 -0700, D from BC >> >> <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >In article <e82dnbi9zKkHYy7WnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, >> >> >regor(a)midwest.net says... >> >> >> >> >> >> "D from BC" <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote in message >> >> >> news:MPG.261c26f5d5a8546d989733(a)209.197.12.12... >> >> >> > Roger... >> >> >> > Larkin has faith in God but wrote recently that he makes no claim >> >> >> > that >> >> >> > God exists. >> >> >> > Does he believe in God or not? >> >> >> > Is he just wishing for a God? Or is his believing in God/Jesus >> >> >> > for a >> >> >> > ticket to heaven. >> >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> >> He seemed pretty clear on it but you seem to have muddied up what >> >> >> he wrote. >> >> > >> >> >Larkin posted that there are very intelligent engineers and >> >> >mathematicians that are Christian. >> >> >This is a defense for Christianity. >> >> >> >> Your logic could equally become a defense of alcoholism. Some great >> >> electronic designers were alcoholics. >> >> >> >> >Then Larkin posts that he made no claim that God exists. >> >> >> >> Cite a post where I made a solid claim one way or the other. >> >> >> >> >He might still believe in God or have faith in God. >> >> >> >> If I did, it would trash your argument that Christians can't be good >> >> electronic designers. >> > >> >'If I did' ... If I'm understanding your response correctly... >> >This means you have no belief in God and no faith in God. >> >Then you are atheist. >> >Larkin is an atheist. >> >Correct? >> >> When have you ever been correct? >> >> John > > Are you implying that you are religious? > Then what religion? > Why are you being evasive and not being clear by not posting 'I am an > atheist.' Or 'I am a Christian.' Or whatever cult you might be part of. > > I dare you to post 'I Larkin am a __________' > Fill in blank with religion or lack of religion(atheist). > > btw... Since the majority is Christian, it's potentially bad for > business for you to clearly post 'I Larkin am an atheist.' > It's an acceptable reason to reject my dare. > > But if you're one of 38000 Christian denominations (or other religion), > then what reasons do you have to have faith in God? > > Maybe you are Buddhist? Afaik there's no God in the Buddhist religion. > > > D from BC > British Columbia > How does asking you if you have ever been correct imply that he is religious? Try to learn something: There are brain surgeons that are Christians There are rocket scientists that are Christians There are nuclear physicists that are Christians And then there you are, an Atheist that lowers the average IQ of Atheists. Like I said in another post, learn why Atheists 100X smarter than you are now believers, then come back with more informed questions. RogerN
From: RogerN on 1 Apr 2010 18:36 "John Larkin" <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote in message news:dj3ar5hao100b6h1gdsa47gui4ah991oov(a)4ax.com... > On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 11:03:30 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> > wrote: > >>In article <a4l9r55c932agh44aqbbgar5jhgl9ta3gv(a)4ax.com>, >>jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... >>> >>> On Thu, 1 Apr 2010 10:07:51 -0700, D from BC <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> >In article <c1a9r5h1cmfjptvm4ccgqhvhq0c59jlpb5(a)4ax.com>, >>> >jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com says... >>> >> >>> >> On Wed, 31 Mar 2010 21:59:12 -0700, D from BC >>> >> <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> >In article <e82dnbi9zKkHYy7WnZ2dnUVZ_q-dnZ2d(a)earthlink.com>, >>> >> >regor(a)midwest.net says... >>> >> >> >>> >> >> "D from BC" <myrealaddress(a)comic.com> wrote in message >>> >> >> news:MPG.261c26f5d5a8546d989733(a)209.197.12.12... >>> >> >> > Roger... >>> >> >> > Larkin has faith in God but wrote recently that he makes no >>> >> >> > claim that >>> >> >> > God exists. >>> >> >> > Does he believe in God or not? >>> >> >> > Is he just wishing for a God? Or is his believing in God/Jesus >>> >> >> > for a >>> >> >> > ticket to heaven. >>> >> >> > >>> >> >> >>> >> >> He seemed pretty clear on it but you seem to have muddied up what >>> >> >> he wrote. >>> >> > >>> >> >Larkin posted that there are very intelligent engineers and >>> >> >mathematicians that are Christian. >>> >> >This is a defense for Christianity. >>> >> >>> >> Your logic could equally become a defense of alcoholism. Some great >>> >> electronic designers were alcoholics. >>> >> >>> >> >Then Larkin posts that he made no claim that God exists. >>> >> >>> >> Cite a post where I made a solid claim one way or the other. >>> >> >>> >> >He might still believe in God or have faith in God. >>> >> >>> >> If I did, it would trash your argument that Christians can't be good >>> >> electronic designers. >>> > >>> >'If I did' ... If I'm understanding your response correctly... >>> >This means you have no belief in God and no faith in God. >>> >Then you are atheist. >>> >Larkin is an atheist. >>> >Correct? >>> >>> When have you ever been correct? >>> >>> John >> >>Are you implying that you are religious? >>Then what religion? >>Why are you being evasive and not being clear by not posting 'I am an >>atheist.' Or 'I am a Christian.' Or whatever cult you might be part of. >> >>I dare you to post 'I Larkin am a __________' > > > OK, you win. > > I Larkin am an electronics design engineer. You aren't. > > John Oh yeah!!! D from BC is an idiot and you aren't! So there! Take That! :-) RogerN
From: D from BC on 1 Apr 2010 18:41
Wouldn't it make me look stupid if you were bluntly clear and posted 'I Larkin am an atheist' or 'I Larkin am a Christian'. Show which way I was confused. If you're a Christian, why not make it public. You're in the gang, in the club, part of the group, in the herd. You should easily be able to post 'I am Christian.' Or post 'I am a _______ Christian.' Where _____ is one of those 38000 Christian denominations. It should be easy for you to post that you're Christian because the majority of North America is Christian. This should be as easy you writing 'I am an engineer.' Are you going to let some stupid atheist make you shy in posting what religion you are in. Perhaps there's lots of Christians on SED that would feel all warm and fuzzy inside after you post 'I Larkin am a Christian engineer.' -- D from BC British Columbia |