"Elmer" <nylicens@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:NvjEj.157$NU2.120@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| adman wrote:
| > "MarkA" <nobody@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
| > news:pan.2008.03.19.17.33.39.367262@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| > | On Wed, 19 Mar 2008 06:05:04 -0600, adman wrote:
| > |
| > | >
| > | > "Jon Schild" <jjs@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
| > | > news:frpja2$egp$2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
| > | > |
| > | > | Sound of Fart wrote:
| > | > | > http://www.lewrockwell.com/reed/reed59.html
| > | > | >
| > | > | > The Metaphysics of Evolution
| > | > | >
| > | > | > by Fred Reed
| > | > | >
| > | > | >
| > | > | [lots of crap snipped]
| > | > |
| > | > | So, this boils down to the idea that science has one chance to
get
| > every
| > | > | detail of an idea right, and if there is ever any refinement, it
| > proves
| > | > | that the whole science is wrong. What a load of bullcookies.
| > | >
| > | >
| > | > If something is wrong then it needs to be changed. If something
needs
| > | > constant revision, then the foundation was wrong. It is really
THAT
| > simple.
| > |
| > | Gee, that's funny. Computers have been refined and revised
constantly
| > | since ENIAC was built in 1946, yet it appears their foundation is
strong.
| > | Have you ever considered the possibility that you are full of shit?
| >
| > ROFLing!!!
| >
| > Had Mac won the PC wars of the 80's we would all have REAL computers!
|
| Hmmm, this I doubt. Think about it. Apple got rid of Jobs and hired in
that Coke
| executive when they were flying high. Even had the Coke guy not screwed
up, do
| you think Apple could have beaten out PC's with a Coke guy leading
them???
Mac is superior today, as it was yesterday.
|
