Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the World’s First Pictures of Snowflakes | Trivia Genius

There’s a fellow in Michigan named Mark who has studied snowflakes - has images to prove it. ;+) -Original Message- >From: "Daniel J. Matyola" >Sent: Aug 19, 2020 2:07 PM >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List >Subject: Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer

Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the World’s First Pictures of Snowflakes | Trivia Genius

20 2:07 PM To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the World’s First Pictures of Snowflakes | Trivia Genius Where else but Vermont to study snowflakes? That is an interesting and informative article. Thanks for posting the link. Dan Maty

Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the World’s First Pictures of Snowflakes | Trivia Genius

ges to prove it. ;+) > > > -Original Message- > >From: "Daniel J. Matyola" > >Sent: Aug 19, 2020 2:07 PM > >To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List > >Subject: Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the > World’s First Pictures of Snowfla

Re: Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the World’s First Pictures of Snowflakes | Trivia Genius

Where else but Vermont to study snowflakes? That is an interesting and informative article. Thanks for posting the link. Dan Matyola *https://tinyurl.com/DJM-Pentax-Gallery * On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 1:53 PM Paul Sorenson wrote: > >

Semi OT “Snowflake” Bentley: The Vermont Farmer Who Took the World’s First Pictures of Snowflakes | Trivia Genius

https://www.triviagenius.com/wilson-bentley-vermont-farmer-who-took-the-worlds-first-pictures-of-snowflakes/XzrmSvaawAAGI7O-?utm_source=blog_medium=email_campaign=1140416561 https://tinyurl.com/y6bcr9hu -p -- Paul Sorenson Studio1941 Sooner or later "different" scares people. -- PDML

Re: OT: Snowflake

- Original Message - From: graywolf Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake Should not comment, but while some things in nature seem to be cleverly designed, others are so silly they defy the concept of intelligent design. Of course somehow those get overlooked by those who want their faith

Re: OT: Snowflake

From: Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/26 Thu PM 10:51:43 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake Well said. Absolutes are always ill-conceived. Paul Thank you. I needed that smile this morning. On Oct 26, 2006, at 5:09 PM, Gonz wrote

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 27/10/06, P. J. Alling, discombobulated, unleashed: The only time I ever saw God was during the '60's if you get my drift. LOL Mark! -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|http://www.cottysnaps.com _ -- PDML

Re: OT: Snowflake

Scott Loveless wrote: Faith is believing what you know ain't so. -Mark Twain, Following the Equator Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -- Philip K. Dick (science fiction author) I think we should wait til all the facts are in Major Buck

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 26/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: Oh god (or lack thereof), what have I done? John Celio ...wishes snowflakes wouldn't make people start talking about creationism... Sorry, that was my fault. But I'm still an atheist, so the snowflake didn't quite convert me ;-) --

AW: OT: Snowflake

PFAM==Pentax for adults Mailing list PFKM==Pentax for kids Mailing list . Markus -Ursprungliche Nachricht- Von: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Auftrag von Godfrey DiGiorgi Gesendet: Donnerstag, 26. Oktober 2006 23:30 An: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Betreff: Re: OT

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 11:10 AM, Tom C wrote: At best you are saying that even though something looks like it may have designed, it's rational to conclude that it was not, until evidence proves it was. Bob only said that it's a logical fallacy to conclude that it is. That doesn't imply

Re: OT: Snowflake

Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake Well said. Absolutes are always ill-conceived. Paul Thank you. I needed that smile this morning. On Oct 26, 2006, at 5:09 PM, Gonz wrote: Faith and knowledge are not orthogonal to each other, which is what the original statement implied. I may know how

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 12:24 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: And there are those who say they've seen God. I have no reason to believe that the aperture simulator exists. I think it's an invention of sick minds that compensates for their inability to accept the guilt of original sin. Well, as we all

Re: Re: OT: Snowflake

Of course, that's why I'm an agnostic, not an atheist or believer in any God. I can't know, so I just consider the possibilities, and being outside the system the design theory seems to have much less success in predicting results of natural processes than the scientific theory. So, if you are

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 10/27/06, Bob Shell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 27, 2006, at 12:24 AM, Paul Stenquist wrote: And there are those who say they've seen God. I have no reason to believe that the aperture simulator exists. I think it's an invention of sick minds that compensates for their inability to

RE: OT: Snowflake

Bob Shell wrote: Well, as we all should know, improper exposure is a cardinal sin. If you believe, I mean if you really BELIEVE, in the Aperture Simulator, it will save your soul from this sin. You could always do a mock up in cardboard and stick it on the back of your camera. Then you

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 8:31 AM, DagT wrote: Of course, that's why I'm an agnostic, not an atheist or believer in any God. I can't know, so I just consider the possibilities, and being outside the system the design theory seems to have much less success in predicting results of natural

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 9:00 AM, Malcolm Smith wrote: Bob Shell wrote: Well, as we all should know, improper exposure is a cardinal sin. If you believe, I mean if you really BELIEVE, in the Aperture Simulator, it will save your soul from this sin. You could always do a mock up in cardboard

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 1:49 AM, David Mann wrote: To conclude without experiment would require rigorous mathematical proof. Mathematics scares me, so I'll happily settle for ignorance. Mark! It's the rigor which scares me, not the Mathematics. G -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 12:35 AM, Cotty wrote: Oh god (or lack thereof), what have I done? ...wishes snowflakes wouldn't make people start talking about creationism... Sorry, that was my fault. But I'm still an atheist, so the snowflake didn't quite convert me ;-) Remember God's Final

Re: Re: OT: Snowflake

Of course one should never be too impressed by the sciences ability to explain natural phenomena. Because science is by definition after the fact. The rules of science and math are based on observation of the very things they attempt to describe. It follows that the pieces would fit together

Re: OT: Snowflake

Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical concept which wonts for proof, but do not factor into the proof itself. Mathematics is the study of provable truth using logic, which provides a structure for

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 6:15 AM, Bob Shell wrote: I'm quite convinced that we have got most of the history/evolution of humans wrong. We've made great, sweeping statements based on a ridiculously small amount of evidence. And we've ignored evidence when it doesn't fit our preconceptions.

Re: OT: Snowflake

So, as a contrast: What does religion say before the fact? Any predictions that we can check? DagT Den 27. okt. 2006 kl. 16.09 skrev [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Of course one should never be too impressed by the sciences ability to explain natural phenomena. Because science is by definition

Re: OT: Snowflake

From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: 2006/10/27 Fri PM 02:12:17 GMT To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical

Re: OT: Snowflake

Just a small additional note to get this a little bit less OT: Remember that Einsteins work on the photoelectric effect (which got him the Nobel Prize in physics a hundred years ago) gave a sound enough prediction of what was possible to make that we are able to make pictures using matrixes

Re: OT: Snowflake

This might help. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Steve On 10/27/06, Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Prof. Behe's claims have been conclusively disproved many times. Here is a summary of just some of the disproofs: http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design1/article.html which

Re: OT: Snowflake

when I see a snowflake, I don't think of a divine creator OR math and physics. I just think goddam I hate this fucking cold weather! -- Christian http://photography.skofteland.net -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT: Snowflake

Christian wrote: when I see a snowflake, I don't think of a divine creator OR math and physics. I just think goddam I hate this fucking cold weather! Heh. I think 'Thank god, now we get some real weather'. But then again, I'm half Finn, and grew up in the BC Interior and Northern

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 10:15 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I'm quite convinced that we have got most of the history/evolution of humans wrong. We've made great, sweeping statements based on a ridiculously small amount of evidence. And we've ignored evidence when it doesn't fit our

Re: OT: Snowflake

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical concept which wonts for proof, but do not factor into the proof itself. Mathematics is the study of provable truth using logic,

RE: OT: Snowflake

From: Bob W [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: 'Pentax-Discuss Mail List' pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: OT: Snowflake Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 06:34:02 +0100 Prof. Behe's claims have been conclusively disproved many times. Here is a summary of just some of the disproofs

Re: OT: Snowflake

If I were ever to see a snowflake here I'd think, Sweet, hell's freezing over Dave On 10/27/06, Christian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: when I see a snowflake, I don't think of a divine creator OR math and physics. I just think goddam I hate this fucking cold weather! -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail

Re: OT: Snowflake

: OT: Snowflake Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 11:15:20 -0400 On Oct 27, 2006, at 10:15 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote: I'm quite convinced that we have got most of the history/evolution of humans wrong. We've made great, sweeping statements based on a ridiculously small amount of evidence. And we've

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 27/10/06, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed: when I see a snowflake, I don't think of a divine creator OR math and physics. I just think goddam I hate this fucking cold weather! Now it's my turn to snort tea. Thanks. -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places,

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at 11:00:35PM -0600, William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: P. J. Alling Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake The only time I ever saw God was during the '60's if you get my drift. How about Goddesses? I've seen a few of those. I've seen a green one

RE: OT: Snowflake

Of course. On the last day the dead will rise again. -- Cheers, Bob -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of DagT Sent: 27 October 2006 15:29 To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake So, as a contrast: What does religion

RE: OT: Snowflake

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cotty Sent: 27 October 2006 17:35 To: pentax list Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake On 27/10/06, Christian, discombobulated, unleashed: when I see a snowflake, I don't think of a divine creator OR math and physics. I just

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 8:15 AM, Bob Shell wrote: I'm quite convinced that we have got most of the history/ evolution of humans wrong. We've made great, sweeping statements based on a ridiculously small amount of evidence. And we've ignored evidence when it doesn't fit our preconceptions.

Re: OT: Snowflake

Of course mathematics is based on observation. It's a method of assigning values to our environment that we perceive as logical. The truth of mathematics is only provable, because the logic is itself based on observation. When the first cavement decided to count the trees in his yard, he was

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 8:34 AM, Gonz wrote: Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical concept which wonts for proof, but do not factor into the proof itself. Mathematics is the study of provable truth

RE: OT: Snowflake

Again? Has this happened before (the dead rising)? Shel [Original Message] From: Bob W Of course. On the last day the dead will rise again. So, as a contrast: What does religion say before the fact? Any predictions that we can check? -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 11:31 AM, Bob W wrote: when I see a snowflake, I don't think of a divine creator OR math and physics. I just think goddam I hate this fucking cold weather! Now it's my turn to snort tea. Try coke some time. It's the real thing. These are cola nuts ... G -- PDML

RE: OT: Snowflake

On Fri, 27 Oct 2006, Bob W wrote: Try coke some time. It's the real thing. Nah, too many bubbles... Kostas -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

Re: OT: Snowflake

You may be old enough to be my father (my mother is in her 80s ... ;-) but what you are saying here is simply incorrect. Assigning symbolic values to things is not mathematics. It is a basic capability of the human brain also expressed in language and does not depend upon logic. Mathematics

RE: OT: Snowflake

Try coke some time. It's the real thing. Nah, too many bubbles... Kostas - All the world's a tiny bubble floating inside the truth - Paul McCartney. Something to think about... Tom C. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: OT: Snowflake

Well, I'm relieved to learn that i'm not old enough to be your father. But my sceptical brain doesn't accept absolutes. I consider logic a human invention. We'll just have to disagree. Paul -- Original message -- From: Godfrey DiGiorgi [EMAIL PROTECTED] You may

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 27, 2006, at 3:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I'm relieved to learn that i'm not old enough to be your father. But my sceptical brain doesn't accept absolutes. I consider logic a human invention. We'll just have to disagree. Of course logic is a human invention. How could

Re: OT: Snowflake

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Oct 27, 2006, at 8:34 AM, Gonz wrote: Whoa laddie! Mathematics is not a code, and it is not based on observation. Observations of the world might inspire a Mathematical concept which wonts for proof, but do not factor into the proof itself. Mathematics is the

Re: OT: Snowflake

I'm quite convinced that we have got most of the history/evolution of humans wrong. We've made great, sweeping statements based on a ridiculously small amount of evidence. And we've ignored evidence when it doesn't fit our preconceptions. Yeah. Douglas Adams got it right. We are the

Re: OT: Snowflake

All this from a snowflake. Miracles exist. As to God, well, whatever suits. ... G On Oct 27, 2006, at 1:03 PM, Gonz wrote: ... Of course, its still useful (logic). But it (science/math) can never be complete, and the incompleteness theorem never defines the limits, it just says for any

Re: OT: Snowflake

So how about absolute zero? G On Oct 27, 2006, at 12:48 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, I'm relieved to learn that i'm not old enough to be your father. But my sceptical brain doesn't accept absolutes. I consider logic a human invention. We'll just have to disagree. Paul

Re: OT: Snowflake

Should not comment, but while some things in nature seem to be cleverly designed, others are so silly they defy the concept of intelligent design. Of course somehow those get overlooked by those who want their faith to be correct. However, I have no doubt that there is a god because the

Re: OT: Snowflake

John Celio wrote: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368.jpg Now, when do you think Pentax will come out with a macro lens that can do that? [...] Hi John, This is on the order of Hey! You brought it up! ;-) Starting with the site above, which really whetted my

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 25/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368.jpg Now, when do you think Pentax will come out with a macro lens that can do that? That is astonishing. I'm an atheist but it's difficult to look at that photo and not perceive

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Thu, 26 Oct 2006 09:42:35 +0100, Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 25/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368.jpg Now, when do you think Pentax will come out with a macro lens that can do that? That is

Re: OT: Snowflake

I can't even put that photo into perspective. To me it looks like a piece of machinery. I can't reconcile that with a snowflake - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 6:42 PM Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake On 25

Re: OT: Snowflake

Op Thu, 26 Oct 2006 11:27:08 +0200 schreef J and K Messervy [EMAIL PROTECTED]: - Original Message - From: Cotty [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: pentax list PDML@pdml.net Sent: Thursday, October 26, 2006 6:42 PM Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake On 25/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed

Re: OT: Snowflake

keith_w wrote: Information gained from studying the structure of snow is vital to several areas of science as well as to activities that affect our daily lives... To me, most curious! WHY is it so vital we study the structure of snow? Does anyone know of a 'primer' that I can read, to

Re: OT: Snowflake

So difficult that I tend to disbelieve the caption. Cotty wrote: On 25/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368.jpg Now, when do you think Pentax will come out with a macro lens that can do that? That is astonishing.

RE: OT: Snowflake

-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Cotty Sent: 26 October 2006 09:43 To: pentax list Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake On 25/10/06, John Celio, discombobulated, unleashed: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 26/10/06, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Ah, the Argument from Personal Ignorance - I don't know how that came to be, therefore God made it. Oh I admit it - I'm an ingorant. ;-) -- Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=|

RE: OT: Snowflake

No - I see it has attributes that indicate it has a maker or designer. A roughly symmetrical chipped piece of flint lying on the ground is believed to be an arrowhead. We don't see the aboriginal that crafted the arrowhead yet we believe the event occurred. We don't see the designer of our

Re: OT: Snowflake

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 26/10/06, Bob W, discombobulated, unleashed: Ah, the Argument from Personal Ignorance - I don't know how that came to be, therefore God made it. Oh I admit it - I'm an ingorant. ;-) Me two. -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

RE: OT: Snowflake

- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom C Sent: 26 October 2006 20:41 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: OT: Snowflake No - I see it has attributes that indicate it has a maker or designer. A roughly symmetrical chipped piece of flint lying on the ground

Re: OT: Snowflake

20:41 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: OT: Snowflake No - I see it has attributes that indicate it has a maker or designer. A roughly symmetrical chipped piece of flint lying on the ground is believed to be an arrowhead. We don't see the aboriginal that crafted the arrowhead yet we believe

Re: OT: Snowflake

The arrowhead is attributed to a human creator precisely because we *do* understand how that creation process took place - an argument based on knowledge, not on ignorance. It's nothing to do with perceived attributes, and everything to do with understanding. On Thu, Oct 26, 2006 at

Re: OT: Snowflake

The only reason why some think things like this has to have a designer is because they cant believe that such structures can have natural causes, which in my view just tells me that they don´t know much about nature. DagT Den 26. okt. 2006 kl. 21.41 skrev Tom C: No - I see it has

Re: OT: Snowflake

] On Behalf Of Tom C Sent: 26 October 2006 20:41 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: OT: Snowflake No - I see it has attributes that indicate it has a maker or designer. A roughly symmetrical chipped piece of flint lying on the ground is believed to be an arrowhead. We don't see

Re: OT: Snowflake

... POML == Pentax Ontology Mailing List PEML == Pentax Epistemology Mailing List PMML == Pentax Metaphysics Mailing List ... Godfrey On Oct 26, 2006, at 2:09 PM, Gonz wrote: Faith and knowledge are not orthogonal to each other, which is what the original statement implied. I may know

Re: OT: Snowflake

On Oct 26, 2006, at 5:27 PM, DagT wrote: On the other hand, this is religion, and even if it is a break in the Aperture Simulator stuff I´ll stop here I thought belief in the Aperture Simulator *was* a religion. Bob -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

RE: OT: Snowflake

By ignorance I mean absence of knowledge, not stupidity. We know (rather than simply believe) that a human created the arrow head not only because it looks man-made, but because it looks man-made _and_ we have multiple compelling lines of independently verifiable and mutually verifying

Re: OT: Snowflake

-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 23:27:56 +0200 If you study entropy you may find that the most efficient way to globally increased entropy is through formation of order locally. This can allow lots of things

Re: OT: Snowflake

On the other hand, this is religion, and even if it is a break in the Aperture Simulator stuff I´ll stop here I thought belief in the Aperture Simulator *was* a religion. Oh god (or lack thereof), what have I done? John Celio ...wishes snowflakes wouldn't make people start talking about

Re: OT: Snowflake

-Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Tom C Sent: 26 October 2006 20:41 To: pdml@pdml.net Subject: RE: OT: Snowflake No - I see it has attributes that indicate it has a maker or designer. A roughly symmetrical chipped piece of flint lying

Re: OT: Snowflake

There is a wide gulf between the assumption that something MUST have had a designer and the much more plausible assumption that something MIGHT have had a designer. Those who believe our knowledge of nature and the universe is complete are themselves lacking in real knowledge and

Re: OT: Snowflake

Yet it still requires an act of faith to attribute any given stone that appears to be an arrowhead to a human creator. Nature can achieve the same result in many different ways. Paul On Oct 26, 2006, at 4:54 PM, John Francis wrote: The arrowhead is attributed to a human creator precisely

Re: OT: Snowflake

: OT: Snowflake Date: Thu, 26 Oct 2006 18:53:56 -0400 Yet it still requires an act of faith to attribute any given stone that appears to be an arrowhead to a human creator. Nature can achieve the same result in many different ways. Paul On Oct 26, 2006, at 4:54 PM, John Francis wrote

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 27/10/06, Paul Stenquist [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yet it still requires an act of faith to attribute any given stone that appears to be an arrowhead to a human creator. Nature can achieve the same result in many different ways. You'd love the UK produced Time Team program :-) -- Rob

Re: OT: Snowflake

On 10/26/06, Tom C [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's interesting that many people, in general, confuse faith with credulity. The biblical definition of faith is anything but that. Hebrews 11:1 - Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though

Re: OT: Snowflake

Scott Loveless wrote: Faith is believing what you know ain't so. -Mark Twain, Following the Equator Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -- Philip K. Dick (science fiction author) -- Thanks DougF (KG4LMZ) -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net

Re: OT: Snowflake

The aperture simulator exists I've seen it. Bob Shell wrote: On Oct 26, 2006, at 5:27 PM, DagT wrote: On the other hand, this is religion, and even if it is a break in the Aperture Simulator stuff I´ll stop here I thought belief in the Aperture Simulator *was* a religion. Bob

Re: OT: Snowflake

And there are those who say they've seen God. I have no reason to believe that the aperture simulator exists. I think it's an invention of sick minds that compensates for their inability to accept the guilt of original sin. Paul On Oct 27, 2006, at 12:20 AM, P. J. Alling wrote: The

Re: OT: Snowflake

The only time I ever saw God was during the '60's if you get my drift. Paul Stenquist wrote: And there are those who say they've seen God. I have no reason to believe that the aperture simulator exists. I think it's an invention of sick minds that compensates for their inability to accept

Re: OT: Snowflake

- Original Message - From: P. J. Alling Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake The only time I ever saw God was during the '60's if you get my drift. How about Goddesses? I've seen a few of those. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo

Re: OT: Snowflake

They never seemed to be Goddesses in the morning... William Robb wrote: - Original Message - From: P. J. Alling Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake The only time I ever saw God was during the '60's if you get my drift. How about Goddesses? I've seen a few of those. William Robb

Re: OT: Snowflake

- Original Message - From: P. J. Alling Subject: Re: OT: Snowflake They never seemed to be Goddesses in the morning... The trick is to sleep late.. William Robb -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net

RE: OT: Snowflake

Prof. Behe's claims have been conclusively disproved many times. Here is a summary of just some of the disproofs: http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/evol/design1/article.html which concludes as follows: Paley's 21st century followers claim that the intelligent design movement is based upon new

OT: Snowflake

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Snowflake_300um_LTSEM,_13368.jpg Now, when do you think Pentax will come out with a macro lens that can do that? ;-) John Celio -- http://www.neovenator.com AIM: Neopifex Hey, I'm an artist. I can do whatever I want and pretend I'm making a statement.

RE: OT: Snowflake

That is pretty neat. Snow is a fascinating subject. Tom C. Original Message Follows From: John Celio [EMAIL PROTECTED] Reply-To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net To: Pentax-Discuss Mail List pdml@pdml.net Subject: OT: Snowflake Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 20:40:27 -0700 http