text:
Tuesday, September 08, 2009
This is very rough and I doubt I'll ever bother to update it to a proper 'final draft' - but, here it is...
NOTE: HUGE DISCLAIMER - the 'Agnostic' in this story represents a particular type of intellectual agnostic that makes assertions about the unknown and unknowable (and sends me countless e-mails) - this doesn't represent EVERY type of agnostic or everyone who uses the label. Many of us have used or currently use the word agnostic to describe ourselves without ever approaching the nonsense represented here.
A very sturdy looking box rests on a table as two men walk up to it…
Theist: That box has a leprechaun in it.
Atheist: I don't believe that...why do you?
Theist: I heard him talking.
Atheist: I don't believe that either...in fact, I have no evidence that leprechauns exist.
Theist: Well, either there's a leprechaun in the box or there isn't, right?
Atheist: Right.
Theist: So it's 50/50...and since I heard him talk, I'm sure that there's a leprechaun in there.
Atheist: Either there's a leprechaun in the box or not, but that doesn't mean the odds are 50/50.
Theist: Of course it does.
Atheist: Actually, it doesn't, but could you offer some evide...
Theist: Hang on! He's just told me that if you don't believe he's in there, he'll chain you to a tree after you're dead and stick his shillelagh up your ass for 10,000 years!
Atheist: Um, wow, but I was asking if you could offer some additional evidence beyond your claim that you heard him. I didn't hear him say that, by the way.
Theist: Well, you're not listening hard enough.
Atheist: Ok (listens)...noth...
Theist: Give it TIME! You've got to sincerely WANT to hear him...
Atheist: If he's in there, I'd like to know it...I'll keep listening.
Theist: Did you hear that?
Atheist: Nope, nothing.
Theist: You're either lying or you're so closed minded that he's not letting you hear him.
Atheist: Not letting me? Leprechauns can choose who can hear them?
Theist: Of course! He could open this lid, show himself to me...and you'd never see it, you'd think the box was closed the whole time. They're MAGIC!
Atheist: Well, do you have any evidence for any of this? I mean, I've never seen a leprechaun...I have no reason to think they even exist and every time you tell me how to prove it, the tests fail.
Theist: No, YOU fail. It worked for me.
Atheist: (Motions toward a handful of people to one side) Well, there are other people here who have tried this...and it failed for them.
Theist: Yes, but these people (motions toward a huge group off to another side) heard it. In fact there are WAY more people over here who will tell you they heard it.
(The Atheist moves off to ask them a few questions.)
Atheist: I talked to some of them...they all have a slightly different take on this. Some say it's a leprechaun; others say it's a fairy; still others say it's a goblin. They don't all describe the same voice and they apparently have conflicting messages that they claim came from inside the box. Most of them simply said that they knew other people who claimed to know what was in the box.
Theist: Ah, yes! There's actually a troll in the box with the leprechaun. He sometimes pretends to be the leprechaun, or a fairy, or a goblin in order to fool those other people - but you'll notice they STILL heard something.
Atheist: Yes, some say that, but others don't.
Theist: Well, that troll sometimes blocks the sounds so people can't hear it.
Atheist: So, how do you know, when you hear the leprechaun, that you aren't hearing the troll?
Theist: Don't be absurd! The leprechaun is my friend; he makes sure that I only hear him.
Atheist: But how can you be sure...if you think there's a troll there too, who pretends to be a leprechaun...how can you know? Maybe there's ONLY the troll and he's just fucking with you.
Theist: Now you're just being thick. Look, there's a box, right?
Atheist: Yup.
Theist: Now why would there be a box here unless there was something in it?? There MUST be something in it, right?
Atheist: No, the box could be empty.
Theist: No it couldn't, or there'd be no reason for the box to exist! Boxes are for holding things. We all know that.
Atheist: So you're claiming that the box could not possibly be empty?
Theist: Correct.
Atheist: And you don't see that as a flawed premise?
Theist: No, and it's confirmed by the fact that I heard a leprechaun.
Atheist: How did you hear him?
Theist: He talks to me telepathically.
Atheist: Oh, so you didn't mean to listen with my ears, you meant listen with my mind?
Theist: Your heart.
Atheist: That doesn't listen...
Theist: Your metaphoric heart!
Atheist: Ok...but that guy says he heard it with his ears.
Theist: He's wrong...he's hearing the troll.
Atheist: But I don't even hear the troll.
Theist: He's blocking you.
Atheist: Ok...how do you know all of this?
Theist: The leprechaun told me.
Atheist: Ok, so you've made appeals to magic, telepathy, leprechauns, trolls and non-empty boxes....you've offered no evidence. I'm sorry, but I don't believe you.
Theist: Don't forget the shillelagh!
Atheist: Right… and you've made threats about things that'll happen after I'm dead - when there's no evidence that there's any 'me' to experience anything after I'm dead. I just don't believe your claim.
Theist: What if you're wrong? Isn't that a lot to risk? He says he's got a pot of gold for you if you believe...isn't that worth believing?
Atheist: Look, even if I could make myself believe, which I can't, why would I want to do that? If there's no leprechaun in there, then I've wasted the opportunity find out what's really in the box. And if he wants me to follow his instructions...
Theist: Oh, he does...I've written them down for you, here...
Atheist: (Looks at the list) Then I'll have wasted time doing things that...does that say "Do not eat poo"?
Theist: Yup...great rule, isn't it?
Atheist: Yeah, but what about "Drop money in the box"
Theist: He's got needs too...pots of gold don't grow on trees.
Atheist: I thought he was magic.
Theist: He is...but, well, the money is so we can tell other people what the leprechaun wants.
Atheist: Why doesn't he tell them?
Theist: He could, but...well, he will, if they're open too it. Some, like you, are fooled by the troll.
Atheist: Why doesn't he get rid of the troll.
Theist: It's a mystery, but we're sure he will eventually.
Atheist: Anyway, if this isn't true, then I'll have wasted a lot of time and money on something false...only to avoid a threat that wasn't real.
Theist: Yeah...but what if you're wrong.
Atheist: Ok...look, I'm done. I do NOT believe there's a leprechaun in the box.
Theist: How can you be sure?
Atheist: I'm not, but I don't believe there is.
Theist: How can you say there's no leprechaun in the box!
Atheist: I didn't...I said I don't believe there is one.
Theist: Same thing.
Atheist: No it isn't...however, now that I've considered and rejected your claim...
Theist: Don't do it!
Atheist: I'm willing to say that I actually do believe there is no leprechaun in that box.
Theist: NO! You're making an irrational claim...you think you know everything?!??!
Atheist: No, I'm not claiming that I'm absolutely certain that there's no leprechaun in the box...but I actually believe, to some degree of certainty that there isn't...because if there were, I'd expect there to be some evidence to support it, and investigations keep coming up empty. I'll be back with some tools...we're going to open that box.
Theist: You can't open the box.
Atheist: Why not.
Theist: You just can't, it's impossible.
(Another person walks up)
Agnostic: He's right. Neither of you know what's in the box. You're both equally absurd to assert that you DO know.
Atheist: I didn't assert that I'm absolutely certain, I simply stated what my belief is...and it's based on the evidence, or lack thereof
Agnostic: Don't be silly...you're just as dogmatic as he is.
Atheist: I'm not dogmatic about this at all - I'd just like to open the box and find out.
Agnostic: The box is impervious.
Atheist: How do you know?
Agnostic: Um, well, I don't...it just seems impervious.
Atheist: Really, do you have other impervious things to compare it to?
Agnostic: Well, um, no...but I'm sure it's impervious.
Atheist: If you'll forgive me, as we're essentially on the same side in that we reject his assertion...
Agnostic: I don't reject it, I don't reject anything
Atheist: Do you accept his claim?
Agnostic: I don't know.
Atheist: You don't know whether you accept his claim?
Agnostic: No, I mean I don't know if he's right or not.
Atheist: Well, neither do I, but that's not what I asked.
Agnostic: The box is impervious
Atheist: Well, you sound just as dogmatic about our inability to know as he does about his private communications with the leprechaun
Agnostic: Now you're just being rude
Atheist: Look, I'm going to open this box
Agnostic: Silly atheist....
(The atheist manages to drill a tiny hole in the box...)
Atheist: Look, it's not impervious! I've got a hole here. We may eventually be able to investigate this in more detail.
Theist: You switched boxes!
Atheist: No, this is the box.
Agnostic: It's STILL impervious; your little hole doesn't give you enough information to support your claim.
Atheist: I can continue to investigate...and so far, there's no evidence to support the theist's claims.
Theist: You switched boxes!
Atheist: No I didn't.
Theist: Then, um...he's hiding. He needs you to believe without seeing him, so he's hiding.
Atheist: That makes no sense.
Theist: The troll has created an illusory hole that is providing you with false information about what's in the box!
Atheist: /sigh
Agnostic: That might be possible, I really couldn't say.
Atheist: No, I bet you couldn't.
The theist walks away, to tell other people about the leprechaun in the box.
The agnostic tries not to be anywhere near either of them, while secretly keeping an optimistic eye on the atheist's activities.
The atheist goes about his life, occasionally finding new ways to investigate the box, but he tries to enjoy his life while preventing the theist from ruining it by imposing the leprechaun's rules on everyone.
67 comments:
"... but he tries to enjoy his life while preventing the theist from ruining it by imposing the leprechaun's rules on everyone"
I don't know... the rule about not eating poo seems reasonable to me. Why wouldn't you let that rule be imposed on us? Do you hate people's freedom to not eat poo? I think we should adopt this rule in our schools and put up monuments to it in front of courthouses.- Anonymous9/08/2009 6:09 PM
But way farther down on the leprechaun's list is another item detailing the specifics of when you actually should eat poo, thus contradicting the earlier rule...
ReplyDelete - Anonymous9/08/2009 9:29 PM
Excellent. I'd also like to see a video version. The script is great.
ReplyDelete Matt,
Why did you represent an agnostic as a stupid caricature of agnosticism? I read the disclaimer but is it not the same as trying to portray an atheist as someone who believes in nothing?
I know that there are morons claiming to be agnostic but there are also atheist morons. Why not make the atheist in your story just as stupid as the other two characters?
I know why. It's because he's the hero - boldly battling straw men!"Matt,
Why did you represent an agnostic as a stupid caricature of agnosticism? I read the disclaimer but is it not the same as trying to portray an atheist as someone who believes in nothing?
I know that there are morons claiming to be agnostic but there are also atheist morons. Why not make the atheist in your story just as stupid as the other two characters?
I know why. It's because he's the hero - boldly battling straw men!"
Oh hey, I think I hear the troll!- Anonymous9/09/2009 1:20 PM
Just to ask, what should the agnostic be portrayed like? In general, I encounter two types of agnostics, both of which are portrayed in the story:
1. The classical agnostic who claims god is unknown and unknowable to himself and, perhaps, to everyone else as well. Depending on what exactly is claimed by this person, it can be just as unreasonable as is portrayed in the story. On what grounds could a person, for example, claim to "know" that a thing is "unknowable" to himself or anyone else? Alternately, a person can reasonably assert "I have no knowledge" of this thing. But this very often leads to #2:
2. The layman "agnostic" who thinks there is a fantasy middle ground between theism and atheism—a person who doesn't appear to understand the difference between not believing a claim and believing the opposite. (You ask him what he "believes," and he answers about what he does not "know," and wholly refuses to answer, or utterly lacks the wherewithal to recognize he has not answered, the question of whether he accepts the theist claim, that is whether he "believes it"). It's like asking someone "what is your favorite model of automobile?" And they reply, "Normally I take the bus." I'm left wondering what exactly they failed to understand.
The term "agnostic" is used by loads of people who apply loads of proprietary meanings to it (which makes it difficult to portray), but what sort of agnostic would you have preferred to have seen modeled? What agnostics do you see most often, and how would they respond to the box situation differently than the ones in the story?
I'm general I'm OK with "agnostic theist" or "agnostic atheist"--although I have to agree with Matt the extra "agnostic" label in those cases adds little to nothing to the identity if you accept that 100 percent certainty is a fantasy to begin with (outside of certain, very narrow fields). Tracie:
I understand that agnosticism is a confusing term - even for those that subscribe to it. The problem is - on what ground can you claim to be gnostic (knowledgeable) about a thing? Is it when you have *any* information? In that case nobody would be agnostic. Is it when you have *absolute* certainty about a thing? Then everybody would be agnostic. Is it something in between those extremes? Well, in my opinion that option is the right one.
So where do I draw the border - I say I am agnostic about a matter when I don't have enough information (or the information is conflicting) to form a belief about the matter. To give you an example - if you flip a coin and just slap it on the counter and cover it with your hand, of course, I don't know whether it's heads or tails. The thing is, that I can't even form a belief about it - I can't say 'I believe it's tails' and cant say 'I don't believe it's tails' either. I'm agnostic about the matter.
Now, you could say - "I say it's tails. Do you believe *me*?" That is something I could under normal conditions evaluate. I could, for instance, see that you had no chance to check the outcome of the flip and you are just guessing. In that case I could say - "No, I don't believe *you*." That is a matter I would not be agnostic about [and confusingly enough I would not claim to be gnostic about it either ;)] .
As far as agnosticism towards religions goes, I personaly only claim agnosticism towards some forms of deism, like the thing Einstein believed in. But I researched religions a lot. I can imagine that someone that for one reason or another haven't done much study in philosophy and religion, can honestly say he/she hasn't got enough information to form a belief about them and therefore is agnostic.@stenlis
Interesting response because I recently heard them using the exact same coin analogy on the show. I am not sure it was a recent episode though. Is that just a coincidence...?
Anyway, I think that using that analogy, what you need to reply to is this: Do you believe the claim "It's tail" ?
Your answer will be "No". Therefore, you're an "atheist". An "agnostic atheist" of course because you don't know...
Note that to you would also say that you do not believe the claim "It's head". Remember that it's not because you reject a claim that you accept its opposite.
But what if the person hiding the coin was to tell you: "I have 350 coins under my hand because that's what happens when I slap and hide a coin". Well, then you would be a "gnostic atheist" in regard of that claim since you know what coins look like and you can be sure that the person is wrong. Not any guess is of equal value!
I'll stop here and leave it to others to make the parallel with a god, since we all know that it's a bit more complicated...stenlis: "The thing is, that I can't even form a belief about it - I can't say 'I believe it's tails' and cant say 'I don't believe it's tails' either."
You CAN actually say "I don't believe it's tails" and you just did when you said "I can't say 'I believe it's tails'"
That is the default position to any claim. Saying that you don't believe it's tails does not equal believing it's not tails. It's only a statement that rejects one specific belief about it being tails.[You CAN actually say "I don't believe it's tails"]
I can't because I don't "don't believe it's tails". I think there's a pretty good chance it is, namely 50-50 but I just don't know.
[That is the default position to any claim. Saying that you don't believe it's tails does not equal believing it's not tails. It's only a statement that rejects one specific belief about it being tails.]
Yup, but I don't want to 'reject one specific belief about it being tails' just out of thin air. I can reject that belief when it comes from a source I think is not knowledgeable about the matter but I can't reject it per se.- Anonymous9/10/2009 7:45 AM
Sten, you're missing the entire point.
Toss out this garbage coin thing; Obviously it's just mucking up the issue.
The default position on any and every claim is rejection of that claim until your standard of evidence is met. Every claim requires a different standard.
If you tell me that your name is Bob, I'm inclined to believe you based solely on your word, simply because your name doesn't matter very much (except in cases of, 'You're not Jim Marley! I am! And that's my uniform!'). However, if you told me your name was "Glexspack Sniggle," I'd reject that claim until you provide me with the legal name change documents.
The simplistic denial of the way basic logic works is absurd. Simply saying, "I don't know" doesn't inform me of what you believe to be true.
Again, if you told me your name was Bob, and I take your word for it, that means I've accepted your claim as true. I believe that your name is Bob.
However, I still don't know. If your neighbor told me that your name was Bob, I'd be reasonably sure that your name is Bob, to the point where I can claim that I know your name is Bob.
This isn't absolute knowledge; Absolute knowledge is an absurd idea in its own right. It could be the case that you've duped your neighbor into thinking your name is Bob.
The same logic applies to a God.
If I tell you that God is in heaven, and he loves you, and if you don't worship him, you'll burn in hell, and all that spew, no matter what your answer is, unless it is, "I believe in that God," you're an atheist, because you have rejected the claim.
Atheism is not the belief that there is no God. It is the rejection of the claim that there is.
In fact, $cientologists are technically atheists, as they reject all the claims of a God, and assert that they were what Xenu used to brainwash Thetans. Or some crap to that effect. - Anonymous9/10/2009 7:54 AM
Oh, and for the record, Stenlis, you're exactly the kind of person that is portrayed by the 'Agnostic' in Matt's story.
ReplyDelete Darknezz:
It seems you haven't read my first reaction to Tracie because you are not addressing my point at all. You also seem to try to insult me in your second post which is no surprise to me as most of the internet flock cannot debate a thing without throwing in an ad hominem.
Let me reiterate my position for you here - agnosticism does not mean one should be agnostic about everything. That would be the same like claiming that atheism means one believes in nothing.
For me agnosticism is not about not having an absolute certainty. When I can form a belief statement about a matter, I don't claim I'm agnostic about it [any more]. When I can't, I do [claim agnosticism].
When you'd come to me preaching about godly love in the heaven, I wouldn't be agnostic about it. In that matter my opinion would be - 'I believe you are wrong' - strong atheism in fact. Twenty years ago my response would be an agnostic - "I can't evaluate that". Most atheist report a similar progression - they went through agnosticism to atheism.
Then most atheist make the mistake of assuming that they abandoned agnosticism because agnosticism is wrong. I disagree. I don't think that when one is an agnostic he is stupid (despite the fact that there are some stupid ones). It's just that the person doesn't have enough information or the information is too ambiguous to form a belief statement about the matter at hand. In that case, I think agnosticism is a logical position.
The 'agnostic' in Matt's story keeps claiming the box is impervious. That is a stupid statement and what's more, how can he *know* (or at least *believe*) it's impervious - that is not an agnostic statement. That character is not agnostic.
Simply saying, "I don't know" doesn't inform me of what you believe to be true.
That's right. And I could not care less. I fart in your general direction!"I can reject that belief when it comes from a source I think is not knowledgeable about the matter but I can't reject it per se."
I don't think this is quite true.
The coin toss analogy to the existence-of-gods question isn't really a very good one. For one thing, it involves:
a) a choice between 2 and only 2 outcomes
b) each outcome is an equally likely event in each run of the experiment.
c) only a limited range of types of experiments yield the 50/50 probability result.
But the question of the existence of any gods does not involve the same 50/50 probability for several reasons.
Unlike the coin toss experiment, the existence-of-gods experiments that have been conducted so far have _only_ produced a does-not-exist result. The does-exist result is not attested _at all_ in any of the experiments conducted so far.
Also, a wider variety of experiments have been conducted than merely something like a coin toss and _all_ of them have yielded _only_ a does-not-exist result. We've looked for gods behind not only natural processes in our world but artificial ones as well. I.e. we've looked for the actions of a god behind evolution (come up snake eyes. Other explanations work better) and we've looked for its actions behind, oh, say the operation of an internal combustion engine (snake eyes again, other explanations work better).
So in this case, the probability that a god exists and is responsible for all these processes is definitely NOT 50/50. Instead, we can safely say that the probability of this is low to very low (and the probability that it does not exist is high to very high).
On that basis you CAN reject the belief in the existence of a god. True you can't completely rule it out (until such time you can conclusively _prove_ it doesn't exist or can't exist), but you CAN conclude that the probability that it does exist is low enough to justify rejecting the belief.
To believe something is to make a claim. When you say "I do not believe X is tails", you are saying:
I cannot make the claim that "x is tails".
"Not believing" does not mean you reject the claim. It means you do not subscribe to it.When others say "not believing is the default position", they mean to say that (if we are being rational) we do not make claims about things we have no reason to believe.
As a strong atheist, I would go a little farther, but that is another discussion entirely.- Anonymous9/11/2009 1:51 PM
While we both object to the coin toss as a good analogy, I object for a different reason:
>a) a choice between 2 and only 2 outcomes
The theist question is only half a coin toss. There aren't two possibilities to choose from.
"god exists"
Do you agree with that?
If you do, you're theist. If you don't, you're atheist.
In the coin toss, there is a choice that would be more akin to:
"God exists"
"God doesn't exist"
Which do you believe?
This is NOT the theist/atheist question. It's a strawman fallacy. The "God doesn't exist" choice is a red herring that has zero relevancy to determining whether one is an atheist or a theist.
To say that it's a choice between believing god exists or god does not exist is pure ignorance about what constitutes theism/atheism.
It's not a choice between two opposing beliefs. It's a question of whether you adopt one and only one belief, which is "god exists."
You believe that is true--or you don't. Period. Can you say you believe it? If you can't, then you've answered the question. - Anonymous9/11/2009 1:56 PM
>...I don't know whether it's heads or tails. The thing is, that I can't even form a belief about it - I can't say 'I believe it's tails' and cant say 'I don't believe it's tails' either.
The moment you admit you cannot say you believe it's tails, you've simply restated "I don't believe it's tails." It's the exact same statement. You do not have belief that it is tails.
You are, in fact, the very agnostic I described "who thinks there is a fantasy middle ground between theism and atheism—a person who doesn't appear to understand the difference between not believing a claim and believing the opposite."
Do you believe it's tails?
If you cannot say that you do, then you've answered the question as "no." You do not believe it's tails.
In other words, you do not believe it's heads. You do not believe it's tails.
You do "not believe" either proposition--since, as you admit, you have no belief. Atheism is the absence of belief in god--which would be like the absence of belief it's tails. You are not a believer (a believer would be a theist--someone who says they have a belief that it's tails).
The atheist is one who does not believe a god exists. (Someone who says they do not have a belief that it is tails).
The atheist does not believe a god exists--has no belief in the existence of a god. He may, also, not believe no god exist--have no belief in the claim no gods exist.
ALL that matters, though, is whether or not he has belief that a god exists. If he cannot say he does believe god exists, then the answer is "no, he does not have belief in the existence of a god."
If you don't have a belief—then you do "not believe" god exists.
Anyone who does not have belief in the existence of a god is an atheist. - Anonymous9/11/2009 2:21 PM
>Then most atheist make the mistake of assuming that they abandoned agnosticism because agnosticism is wrong.
I have to disagree with this as well. I've met just as many if not more people who identify as agnostic atheists than gnostic atheists.
Most atheists I have met understand the difference between knowledge and belief--far more than people who think you can claim to be "agnostic" _instead of_ atheist (or theist), which is a stance based on ignorance of what theism/atheism constitute.
One is either theist or atheist. Whether one is Gnostic or agnostic is another question entirely. "What do you know" is not the the same question as "what do you believe?"
If I ask if you believe X, and you answer "I don't know," there are only two options:
1. You've misunderstood the question.
2. You mean to say you don't know if you believe X or not.
If #2, then you don't know what "believe" means. Believe means to accept a claim as true. And you know if you think a claim is true, because you can say about such claims, "Yes, I think X is true."
If you "don't know" if you can say you think it's true, then you don't have "belief"--which is the point at which you do, in fact, accept the claim as true.
"I don't know" is generally confused shorthand for "I haven't really come to believe this yet."
It's what a person says when they don't believe something, but they haven't really come to grips yet with the reality that they don't believe it. But until you have belief, you're one who doesn't have belief. Until you believe, you don't believe.
Until you have a car, you don't have a car. "I'm still thinking about buying a car" is _still_ the same as not having a car. "Atheist: I didn't assert that I'm absolutely certain [that there is no leprechaun], I simply stated what my belief is...and it's based on the evidence, or lack thereof."
I've always found this to be a bit of a red herring. The agnostic atheist criticism of some atheists is not, "how can you be absolutely certain?" it's "how can you have any degree of certainty whatsoever?"
Finding that the predictions of a model do not match up with your observations does not imply, to any degree of certainty, that the model is false. It only means that the model is currently useless.
Why doesn't the lack of evidence, or presence of contradicting evidence, imply falsity? Because we can never know to what extent our observations match up with "reality".
Imagine a situation like the one in the Matrix - where all of our observations are being generated and fed to us by computers. Can you disprove such a possibility? Can you even assign a probability? No. But what you can do is point out that such a possibility is nothing we can act upon, and therefore useless.
But wait, if you cannot even assign a probability that the Matrix is true, how can you assign probabilities that anything at all is true? You can't, because for us to assign probabilities to what is "real" or to what "exists" based on our observations, we first have to know to what extent our observations actually correspond to reality.
Does this mean we can't know anything? Maybe, if your definition of knowledge depends on knowing "reality". But at the end of the day, who cares? I accept my observations not as some proxy for reality, but in and of themselves, whether generated by a computer or implanted by a micromanaging deity. As far as science is concerned, it doesn't matter.
"I had no need of that hypothesis." ---Pierre-Simon LaplaceI can assign a probability to the likelihood of the Matrix model being true and it's zero.
The physics doesn't hold water. The stated reason for the whole shebang is to generate energy from the body heat of the people living in the jars. But there is no way that you could generate more energy than it cost you to support them. The whole idea collapses under the laws of thermodynamics.
So the Matrix model isn't going to happen for the reasons given in the movie anyway.Janet: "But there is no way that you could generate more energy than it cost you to support them. The whole idea collapses under the laws of thermodynamics."
Yeah... the laws of thermodynamics in THIS universe. The one created by the evil super computer that wants us to think it'd be impossible. How would you know if the real universe doesn't have different laws of physics?.
That's why I'm a Matrix agnostic and not a non-believer like Janet. She's just as dogmatic as the people who think it's real. Obviously, since we can't know anything with any degree of certainty ever, the only reasonable position is to not believe in the Matrix BUT not not believe in it either. :)@Adrael
You must think yourself rather clever, but maybe if you actually tried to understand what I wrote, you might realize why your response is an absurd non-sequitur / strawman. In general it's a good idea to engage someone else's arguments for what are rather than what you'd prefer to argue against.
Did I say anything about belief? No. I was talking about science - where what you believe is irrelevant. Science is about observations and making practical, predictive models of those observations. That's it. No metaphysical speculation, no assumption about what's "really" going on, no claims about what really exists, none of that. When discussing subjects (like QM) which require precise language to avoid confusion, many canonical textbooks and pioneers in the field point out the folly in talking about whether a claim is probably true or not. (Feynman, Dirac, Pauling)
All of this is to stress the fundamental concept you casually dismissed. We only have access to our own observations. We cannot step outside ourselves and assess their veracity. And because of that, assessing, to any certainty, the veracity of any claim, no matter how mundane, is outside the scope of science and empiricism. What we can do is assess the utility of a claim. Does it make accurate predictions? Is it computationally simple? Is it consistent with other models? Does it shed light on existing problems and suggest further areas of study?
Those are the kind of practical questions we ask about a claim in science, not "what's the probability that it's True?" or "do you or do you not believe it's True?" If you're asking those questions, you've left the realm of science and empiricism.@Janet,
Way to completely miss the point. First of all, I wasn't talking about the Matrix exactly as it was in the movie, I only used it because it's an example many are familiar with. I could just have easily asked if you can assign a probability to whether or not you're only dreaming right now, or if you're merely a "brain in a jar", or whether a deity is directly implanting all of our experiences. Or maybe you're actually locked away in a psych ward, vividly hallucinating all of this.
The specifics aren't important - bottom line is that you cannot in any way determine if your observations correspond to reality. You cannot assess the likelihood that what you are experiencing right now is really what it seems.
Of course, the beauty of science is that it doesn't matter. Science is contigent upon observations, whatever their provenance, not things as they really are. Claims about gods are at their core, claims about things as they really are. So even if a particular part of a claim is testable and comes up negative, that has no bearing on the core claim about reality. Science just rejects it (and all other failed ideas) as useless, not false. Hence Laplace's famous reply to Napoleon concerning God, "I had no need of that hypothesis.""You must think yourself rather clever, but maybe if you actually tried to understand what I wrote, you might realize why your response is an absurd non-sequitur / strawman. In general it's a good idea to engage someone else's arguments for what are rather than what you'd prefer to argue against."
Attention Dhawk. RELEASE THE SPHINCTER!What is it with people who have nothing better to do than give condescending and unasked for advice? Is anyone forcing you to read the comments section? I'd be a lot quicker to shut up if someone had actually offered a response to my argument, or if no one had responded, instead of inane one-offs by people who didn't bother to read it.
But by all means, keep up your crusade to tell people in the comments section of niche blogs to relax and stop caring so much about what other people write on the Internet. It's not hypocritical, I promise. Or you could, you know, ignore the comments that don't interest or pertain to you, and take the time to respond thoughtfully to those that do."What is it with people who have nothing better to do than give condescending and unasked for advice? Is anyone forcing you to read the comments section? I'd be a lot quicker to shut up if someone had actually offered a response to my argument, or if no one had responded, instead of inane one-offs by people who didn't bother to read it.
But by all means, keep up your crusade to tell people in the comments section of niche blogs to relax and stop caring so much about what other people write on the Internet. It's not hypocritical, I promise. Or you could, you know, ignore the comments that don't interest or pertain to you, and take the time to respond thoughtfully to those that do."
Dhawk, allow me to explain what happened that you're not grasping.
Have you ever been at a party where someone told a joke, something clearly for fun and jest, and then someone overhearing it flew into a rant attacking that person as if what they said was entirely serious? Meanwhile the rest of the room is looking at him in sympathetic dread trying to convey to him "dude, it was a joke" before he makes a compleate fool of himself by his knee jerk rant? At the end the person says "um...loosen up I was jokeing" and all he can do is look sheepish and say "oh...." and then there's an awkward silence?
Ok that's what you just did. And it went from sad to hillarious because you just KEPT doing it. Even people trying to help you save face you attacked and lashed out. It's like watching a small dog jump into a glass door, again and again and again...sad yet sadistically funny.@Ing,
There's a difference between making fun of someone and making a joke. Mocking someone and then claiming "it was only a joke" doesn't make it less insulting.
This blog is about a serious topic, and while many posts aren't 100% serious, a great deal of them are. I get that you might not be interested in a serious discussion, but what do you gain by shouting down others that are?@Ing,
There were three people who mentioned the Matrix: I did in my first comment to illustrate my point, Janet did in her response to me, and Adrael in a tongue-in-cheek rebuttal to Janet. As far as I can tell, Janet was completely serious in her reply.
The fact that Adrael was trying to be funny was not lost on me. But when I said earlier there's a difference between mocking someone and making a joke, I wasn't suggesting that you couldn't do both at the same time. My point was that including humor doesn't make the insult less offensive.
Before I had the chance to, Adrael used the absurd arguments of the hypothetical agnostic in Matt's post to "address" Janet's criticism of my argument. That's called poisoning the well - no matter what follows, my argument will be taken less seriously. [pedantry]Technically, it's an appeal to ridicule.[/pedantry] Connecting my arguments with those of the agnostic was an invitation for everyone else to dismiss what I said out of hand.
Now, this meta-discussion is incredibly interesting I'm sure, but why couldn't you engage me on the subject instead? Your first comment in this post was to call the first person who disagreed with the blog post a troll, and your second comment was to tell me (the second person who disagrees) to "relax the sphincter." I just don't see what you gain from it, other than ridicule for the sake of ridicule.1) was a joke about the skit.
I addressed that already, twice - the joke was at my expense, i.e. mockery. He took my position and "defended" it with the absurd arguments of the skit.
2) Grow a sense of humor
I addressed that too. If someone tells you a joke, the punchline of which is spitting in your face, would you find it less insulting than if they had left out the joke before spitting in your face? And if you find yourself routinely telling people they need to grow a sense of humor, maybe you should heed your own advice - maybe you're just not funny.
3) End the discussion now, as we've already prolonged it more than we were asked to.
You're right, we should end the discussion. I appreciate you offering me the opportunity to have the last word. In any case, there's really nothing more to be said.tracie:
you said somewhere that you think I believe there is a 'fantasy middleground' between theism and atheism. Well I do believe there is a middleground - on a higher level then just theism/atheism - there is a middleground between belief and non-belief in general. That middleground is 'not knowing'.
In many instances 'not knowing' and 'not believing' come hand in hand. But there are some when they don't. For instance, open up the last Non Prophets show where Matt talks about dark energy (about 1:30:00 into the show). He goes on to say 'I don't know what my position is on dark energy'. He seems to be in your 'fantasy middlegroung' about the thing - not being able to take a position - like saying 'I don't believe dark energy exists'.
Why is that?- Anonymous9/20/2009 3:20 PM
>there is a middleground between belief and non-belief in general. That middleground is 'not knowing'.
Belief is to accept a claim as true. If you can say that you accept the claim "god exists" is true, then you are a theist. If you do not accept it as true, you are a non-believer (someone who does not assert it is true). There is no middle ground.
God exists.
Can you say you accept that statement as "true"? You either can, or you can't. - Anonymous9/20/2009 3:22 PM
>He goes on to say 'I don't know what my position is on dark energy'. He seems to be in your 'fantasy middlegroung' about the thing - not being able to take a position - like saying 'I don't believe dark energy exists'.
Wrong. And Matt, can contradict me if he'd like, but I know his position. If Matt honestly "doesn't know what his position is" then he cannot say "I believe in dark energy." If you ask Matt, who says he has no position, he WILL tell you that he does not believe in dark energy. - Anonymous9/21/2009 4:30 AM
I sincerely hope you were watching yesterday's AE show. I don't bring other people in usually when it comes to an issue like this. I wouldn't say "Matt says X, therefore you're wrong." In a case like this the "argument from authority" fails using anything but honest context and a dictionary, because we're truly discussing word definition and usage here. But invoking Matt as you did, above, I took the opportunity to pwn that claim, by putting your question directly to Matt.
I asked him if it was correct to say that if he "has no position" on claim X, where claim X is "X exists," that it is fair to say he does not believe X exists.
He confirmed it does.
Your seem unable to wrap your brain around the reality that saying "I have no position on X" is a restatement of "I do not believe X." It's the same statement.
Matt went on to describe _why_ if you're interested in watching the explanation. It was into the show where we had about 20 minutes or so left (rough estimate).
Believe = accept a claim as true.
If I say "Do you believe god exists?"
I'm asking: Do you accept as true the claim god exists?
If you have "no position," then you do not accept the claim is true, since accepting the claim is true _is_ a position.
Your position, in having no position, is that (1) you do not accept the claim as true, and (2) you do not accept the claim as not true.
(1) where we sub "believe" for "accept the claim as true," we have absolutely just said "You do not _believe_ the claim." This is a state of disbelieve. You have no believe. You do not believe in whatever this claim asserts. Unavoidable.
(2) In this section, if we sub "not true" with "false," we have merely restated "I do not believe the claim is false."
An atheist is:
A: Anyone who does not believe the claim "god exists" is true (1)
B: Anyone who believes the claim "god exists" is false. (2)
I understand you do not accept the claim is false--many atheists also do not. But you DO "not believe" the claim god exists. And anyone who does not believe the claim "god exists" is an atheist.
1. You either have belief (conviction this claim is a true claim - believe the claim) or
2. you are unsure about the claim (and so, do not think it's a true claim - do not believe the claim), or
3. you think the claim is false (believe the claim is false).
You are claiming a middle ground between 1 and 2, having a conviction it's true versus not having that conviction.
Not possible.
Up to the point you have the conviction, you don't have it. If you have no position, you have no conviction. You cannot, therefore "believe" the claim. If I cannot believe your claim, then it's a restatement of "I do not believe your claim."
You're trying to argue that means I'm saying I think your claim is false. It doesn't. It means I do not accept the claim as true. That is the state of "not believing." - Anonymous9/21/2009 4:51 AM
Solipsism is useless, I agree. Lately I compared it to a video game. The reality is only virtual, but still operates on rules.
"Reality" operates similarly. There is a Solipsistic level where we have no idea if this reality is real or illusory. But since that claim is useless, and cannot be addressed, we have the option to sit back and starve to death or go forward with the only "reality" presented to us.
If we opt to "live"--then we have chosen "the game," so to speak.
Once we're in this "game" we have rules which we cannot control. In other words, I put my hand on a hot burner, it is unpleasant--whether it's illusory or not.
Let's say that in our video game, we have guns, knives, and bombs available as weapons. But the game has no "magic spears." It has a magic crystal, but there is no way to observe or access the crystal if you are a player. It is utterly unknown to you, and you'll never be aware of it. Only the programmer knows it's there.
The players then are exploring the game world, trying to make sense of it--real or not, because they're in it and can't escape and have no way to know it's not real.
They can only "know" what is presentable to them--what can be discovered. What cannot be discovered cannot be known. And they have zero reason to believe in either the magic spear or the magic crystal. Neither manifests to them in any way--even while one is in the game and the other is not.
To the players, then, "reality" will be one without a magic spear and without a magic crystal.
For "reality" to have any practical use as a word, it must represent the things that manifest, since that which does not manifest cannot be known and included in the set "reality."
If one asserts the magic crystal, they could just as well assert the magic spear, as there is the same level of evidence to the players for both items.
"Existence" to be useful can only include the things that manifest and would, practically have to not include the spear or the crystal.
Since the players can only categorize what they can identify, examine and understand, "existence" can only be those things that fit those requirements.
The spear "is not" and the crystal "is"--but in the only useful and practical vocabulary of the players, neither item "exists."
Existence and reality are not statements about "what is" but "what is manifest."
We cannot include things that do not manifest because in the case of those things there is no way to differentiate between which "are" and which "are not."
Neither the spear nor the crystal can "exist" in the game, to the players. Whether they are or not is irrelevant, since the players have no reason to think those items "are" without manifestation.
If we assert that crystal exists, we must also assert the spear exists, since whatever grounds we use will apply equally to both--as players.
In other words, if god manifests as much as a leprechaun--and the theist rejects leprechauns exist, we have a problem. Both must be accepted or rejected on the grounds that they both manifest to the same degree. To accept the crystal and reject the spear makes no sense, even if it's correct. It's the same as accepting the spear and rejecting the crystal--based on what is available to the players.
As an atheist, I would say neither should be said to exist until it can be demonstrated. The theist feels very sure one exists, but not the other. The theist is inconsistent. Tracie:
I gave it some thought and I found that my problem is rather semantical.
When people say "I do not believe this statement", it is more often then not a position of 'disbelief'.
When I refuse to take a belief position on a statement, you would say "You do not believe that statement", but in this case it is not a position of 'disbelief'. I would agree that it is a 'non-belief' - as it is distinct from a position of believing the statement but by saying that my position is 'agnostic' I try to describe that my position is neither belief nor disbelief.
So - just as you can say that my position is non-belief, you could, as well, say that my position is non-disbelief. And that is what I understand agnosticism to be.
As to Matt's dark energy position - I was not trying to make an argument from authority but rather illustrate a mindset about a claim. I saw Matt say that he does not believe the dark energy claim on the AE show. I wonder if he would say he is in a position I mentioned above - non-belief & non-disbelief - or he actually takes a position of disbelief. It might very well be disbelief - I see that as a matter of preference.
You might feel that there is no space between belief and disbelief. I'm afraid though that (if this is your position) both my claim that there is such a thing and your claim that there isn't can only remain assertions and cannot be proven.- Anonymous1/28/2010 4:40 PM
This is way over-due, and I don't expect a reply. But someone e-mailed our list, and it led me back to this comments section, where I saw your post unanswered.
Disbelief is sometimes described as "not believing" and sometimes as stronger denial. As it includes not believing, Matt would say he does _not believe_ the claim.
And this is your position in regard to the claim "god exists." You don't believe it.
Anyone who does not believe "god exists" is an atheist. You may also be agnostic, but you are, by definition, an atheist as well. Gnomes, elves and leprechauns which is the difference between these creatures?
Thank you
Brad Fallon
PLEASE NOTE: The Atheist Experience has moved to a new location, and this blog is now closed to comments. To participate in future discussions, please visit http://www.freethoughtblogs.com/axp.
This blog encourages believers who disagree with us to comment. However, anonymous comments are disallowed to weed out cowardly flamers who hide behind anonymity. Commenters will only be banned when they've demonstrated they're nothing more than trolls whose behavior is intentionally offensive to the blog's readership.
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.


text:
Expert panel
28th January 2019 | Journal Of Sales Transformation
Select the content CATEGORY and/or article TAG from the dropdown menus to find the sales topic you need. Then press the FILTER BUTTON to display list of relevant articles. Use the SEARCH CONTENT field (top left) to search by author or for a specific phrase or word.
Search hundreds of articles on sales by keyword or author's name. Simply enter your search phrase/word and click the search icon.
28th January 2019 | Journal Of Sales Transformation

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Found 4 results
Author Title Type [ Year] Filters: Author is Siddens, Lisbeth K. [Clear All Filters]
"Cytochrome P450 1b1 in polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH)-induced skin carcinogenesis: Tumorigenicity of individual PAHs and coal-tar extract, DNA adduction and expression of select genes in the Cyp1b1 knockout mouse", Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, vol. 287, no. 2, pp. 149 - 160, 2015.
, "Application of a fuzzy neural network model in predicting polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-mediated perturbations of the Cyp1b1 transcriptional regulatory network in mouse skin", Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, vol. 267, no. 2, pp. 192 - 199, 2013.
, "Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons as skin carcinogens: Comparison of benzo[a]pyrene, dibenzo[def,p]chrysene and three environmental mixtures in the FVB/N mouse", Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology, vol. 264, no. 3, pp. 377 - 386, 2012.
, "Haplotype And Functional Analysis Of Four Flavin-Containing Monooxygenase Isoform 2 (FMO2) Polymorphisms In Hispanics.", Pharmacogenet Genomics, vol. 15, no. 4, pp. 245-256, 2005.


text:
Easter Babies - Digital Stamps
Easter Babies - Digital Stamps is backordered and will ship as soon as it is back in stock.
Digital File & Download Info
Digital File & Download Info
All the products at Digital Craft Supplies are digital downloads; no physical products will be shipped. You will have immediate access to your downloads as soon as your payment is processed. Your downloads will be in ZIP file format, and you will need to unzip (extract) the files before you can use them. You can unzip the files using whatever program that came with your computer. If you have any questions, please feel free to reach out to us. We're happy to help.
Terms of Use
Terms of Use
All the products at Digital Craft Supplies can be used for personal and commercial use (some restrictions may apply), as long as you please adhere to ALL of our Terms of Use. Please keep in mind that different products and/or usages may have different terms, so it's important to read through our Terms of Use in its entirety. Please know that when making a purchase at Digital Craft Supplies, you are agreeing to the terms that are listed on our Terms of Use page. Thank you.
This collection includes six adorable little Easter babies, with cute little Easter pajamas, baby hats, pretty bows, bunny ears, and cotton tails, colored Easter eggs, cute little baby chicks, two large decorated eggs, and baskets filled with Easter eggs. This set contains 6 digital stamps.
These digital stamp images are high quality 300 PPI and come in both transparent (PNG) and non-transparent (JPG) formats. Please read our Terms of Use before making any purchases.
Here are some examples of what you can create using these "Easter Babies" digital stamps:
- Easter Greeting Cards
- Easter Gift Bags / Boxes
- Easter Gift Tags / Labels
- Printable Photo Frames
- Candy Bar Wrappers
- Paint Can Labels
- Cupcake Boxes
- Bag Toppers
- Iron-On Transfers
- Scrapbook Pages
Please see our Creative Ideas page for more examples of how you can use these digital stamps.
Original Artwork by Alice Smith
Digital Craft Supplies is a Licensed Reseller for Alice Smith
Payment & Security
Payment methods
Your payment information is processed securely. We do not store credit card details nor have access to your credit card information.


text: I agree Our site saves small pieces of text information (cookies) on your device in order to deliver better content and for statistical purposes. You can disable the usage of cookies by changing the settings of your browser. By browsing our website without changing the browser settings you grant us permission to store that information on your device.


text:
Showing 1–16 of 756 results
All information contained on the Website, including information related to medical and health conditions or products and treatments, is for informational purposes only. It is not meant to serve as a substitute for the advice provided by your own physician or other medical professionals or any information contained on or in any product packaging or labels. This information is thus often presented in a summary or aggregate form.
You should not use any of the information contained on the website for diagnosing a health problem or prescribing a medication. This information is provided by the manufacturers of the products on or in the product packaging and labels for you to carefully read before using any product purchased on the website. It is always advised to consult your own physician and / or medical advisor before buying it.


text:
The Grudge Cut Out Prank
Want to be a scary prank apologist? Simply download the cutouts and place them strategically to scare the living crap out of someone so badly as to cause them to lose bowel control. Bring a defibrillator just in case you give someone a heart attack.
Newest products
Check out our awesome new products.
Camp Stove Power Charger
If you thought being in the great outdoors meant leaving your electronic devices behind, think again! The Camp Stove Power Charger lets you charge up your gadgets while also enjoying a cozy campfire. Simply add some wood to the stove and let it burn – the built-in power generator will do the rest. Never be without your phone or tablet again, even when you're miles from civilization.
Solar Panel USB Charger
Introducing the solar panel USB charger, your new best friend while camping and hiking! This little powerhouse easily mounts to the surface of your backpack to absorb sunlight, so you can keep all your devices charged up while enjoying nature. Whether you're out for a weekend getaway or on a month-long backpacking trip, never worry about running out of power again.
Navy Seal Survival Book
Are you prepared for the worst? With this Navy SEAL survival book, you can be sure that you're ready for anything. Written by Cade Courtley, a former SEAL and expert on survival, this book is essential reading for anyone who wants to be prepared for the unexpected. From handling natural disasters to escaping from dangerous situations, this book covers it all.
Waterproof Fire Starter Tinder
In the face of nature's fury, don't be left out in the cold. With this waterproof fire starter tinder, you can create a life-saving inferno, no matter what the weather throws at you. It lights quickly and burns smokelessly, so you can stay warm and dry in even the most extreme conditions. Don't be caught unprepared – keep one of these handy tinders with you on all your outdoor adventures.
SAS Survival Handbook
Is luck really a thing? We don't think so. If you want to be prepared for anything life throws your way, you need the SAS Survival Handbook. It's packed with the latest survival knowledge and technology, from basic first aid to hand-to-hand combat and urban survival tips. So whether you're lost in the wilderness or caught in the middle of a zombie apocalypse, you'll be ready to take on whatever comes your way.
Bushcraft 101 Wilderness Survival Book
Bushcrafting is all about being resourceful and learning how to survive in the great outdoors using whatever nature provides. With this Bushcraft 101 Wilderness Survival book, you can learn everything you need to know from expert Dave Canterbury, so you'll be able to look like a pro when you head out into the wilderness. Featuring tons of tips and tricks on building shelters, foraging for food, and avoiding danger, this guide will have you prepared for anything.
The Zombie Apocalypse Survival Manual
Are you prepared for the Zombie Apocalypse? If not, don't worry – The Zombie Apocalypse Survival Manual has got you covered. This essential guidebook contains all the information you need to know to survive when the undead rises up and take over the world. Learn how to protect yourself from zombies, how to find food and shelter in a post-apocalyptic world, and how to thrive in this new society.
Handheld UV Water Purifier
Looking for a way to make unsafe water drinkable? Look no further than the handheld UV water purifier! This little gadget destroys over 99.9% of harmful bacteria, so you can filter up to 8,000 liters of water without ever having to worry about getting sick. Plus, it's super compact and easy to use, so you can take it with you wherever you go.
Military Folding Shovel Multi-Tool
This military folding shovel multi-tool is the ultimate accessory for outdoorsmen of all levels of experience. It's made from high carbon steel and provides you with a range of essential tools, including a fire starter, rescue knife, and saw. With this tool by your side, you'll be ready for anything the great outdoors can throw at you!


text:
Auto insurance protects you against financial loss if you have an accident.
A standard policy insures the home itself and the things you keep in it.
Discover the perfect insurance options to meet your specific and unique needs.
Learn about different health coverage options that fit your specific needs.
Finding insurance doesn't have to be difficult. We do the work for you.
Browse a variety of insurance options in order to find the right one for you.
To contact Cheyenne Frank directly please fill out the following form as completely as possible. When finished, click the Submit button to send your contact request. You will receive a response from us shortly.


text:
"This is where I'll put my article.
"This is line 2."
"This is where I'll put my article.
"This is line 2."
Our Services
Make Your Business - Pitch Perfect
Online marketing is known as digital marketing. It is the key tool for businesses today as it allows people to harness the internet power to take the businesses to next level. iWebHQ, a Digital Marketing/ SEO agency in San Francisco helps gain visibility, promotes website traffic and allows users to get engaged to convert the customers. Most competitors invest in digital strategy, and to stay in this competitive world, it is imperative to have a strong digital presence. It helps in getting the winning edge.
"This is where I'll put my article.
"This is line 2."
Let's do it!
Be Genuine, Be Nice, Know Your Audience
iWebHQ digital marketing services were made to fit the demands of growing services. Everything from our prices to just how we deliver our solutions is customized to fit the needs of your business.
Numerous firms flaunt about working with Fortune 500 companies as well as popular name-brands. We don't. We earn our red stripes by supplying real outcomes for small and medium businesses. We deal with customers that our rivals neglect, as well as do whatever we can to help them.
If you're searching for one of the most cost-efficient digital marketing services for your next campaign, look no further. Contact us today to get a Free Consultation!
Search Engine Optimization -SEO
The practices of white hat SEO and careful keyword research helps in attaining higher organic rankings. The search results ensure increased visibility. The internet marketing company does extensive keyword research, conducts optimization on and off the page, and tracks results. Increasing conversions and attracting leads in high quality is a part of the digital marketing solution.
Modern Web Design
We are more than a SEO agency San Francisco. iWebHQ completes WordPress website development and responsive web design including, search engine optimization and branding. It offers laser focus and takes time to comprehend the business objectives and goals. We offer WordPress web design and take pride in meeting the expectations, and our creativity is in delivering high-performing website design services, offering a business advantage. Our bespoke web development targets to bring results, we create an ultimate solution in growing business and delivering results.
E-Commerce Website Design
We understand the eCommerce nuances for a web design as a social media agency. Selling online products is crucial to see website success. Only, with an optimized design of checkout, one increase conversions. We are the internet marketing agency to partner and allow highlighting as per competitive advantages.
Google Ads - PPC Campaigns
Google Ads operates a pay-per-click design, in which users bid on keywords and also spend for each click on their ads. It's worth the work in the long run, but you need to get your Google ads campaign management right if you expect to have those types of results. Although pay-per-click advertising can certainly transform your business performance, the success of your PPC campaigns is dependent on the company you choose to work with.
Social Media Marketing
Our social media marketing services helps businesses to connect and share information leading to an increase of the brand's awareness, product's visibility or service's recognition. We will tailor social media marketing strategies specifically conceived for your company and targeted audience. You'll get fully managed content planning (and development) among other services that aim to attract new leads and increase royalty from existing customers.
Social Media Ads
Our social media advertising services expedites your results. You can reach people FAST on social networks. This means you can generate new leads, engagement, website traffic and conversions quickly. The bigger ad budget you have, the more audiences we can reach. As you reach more people, you open up the door for more brand awareness, traffic and sales.


text:
Lidcombe's best mobile physiotherapy massages – delivered to your home, hotel or work. Book same-day or in advance. 7 days, 8am-11pm. We bring everything!
Expert therapists
Lidcombe's Best Therapists, At Your Doorstep
All Blys therapists are qualified, insured and have been through a rigorous screening process to ensure you get a 5-star treatment. Most have worked at top clinics, spas, and gyms in Lidcombe. Simply customise your body treatment with where you want, when you want. Book your session via the Blys app or online today!


text:
Previous Lesson
Complete and Continue
The Vocabulary of Science: First Steps to Science Literacy
Welcome to the Course!
Question: Is Evolution a Theory, a Fact, or Both? (4:50)
Why Am I Qualified to Teach This Course? (2:42)
Overview of the Course (2:31)
Update: New Videos on Science Literacy and Science Education
An Important Distinction For the Whole Course
An Important Distinction: Epistemically Loaded vs Epistemically Neutral Language (6:59)
What is a Theory?
"It's Just a Theory": "Theory" as Down-Player (2:56)
"Theories are the Pinnacles of Science": "Theory" as Up-Player (5:11)
Why We Need a Neutral Definition of "Theory" (3:56)
A Neutral Definition of "Theory": A Classical (But Incomplete) Story (6:39)
A Neutral Definition of "Theory": A More Sophisticated Story (6:13)
What is a Fact?
"You Can't Deny the Facts": A Loaded Definition of "Fact" (7:20)
"I Had the Facts Wrong": A Neutral Definition of "Fact" (4:34)
Can There Be Theoretical Facts? (4:48)
What is a Law?
Loaded Definitions of "Law" (4:51)
Examples of Laws in Biology and Psychology (10:15)
Examples of Laws in Physics and Astronomy (7:49)
Unpacking the Neutral Concept of "Law" (10:01)
But Are There Any Laws? (3:15)
A Quick Word: Are Laws Explanatory? (0:31)
What is a Hypothesis?
"That's Just a Hypothesis": A Loaded Definition of "Hypothesis" (1:38)
A Neutral Definition of "Hypothesis" (8:24)
What is a Model?
Introduction: What is a Model? (2:19)
Maps and Models (7:28)
Models as Tools For Reasoning About the World (6:04)
How Equations Can Be Models (7:06)
Is There a Difference Between a Model and a Theory? (5:09)
Theories, Models, Truth and Reality
Introduction: Theories, Models, Truth and Reality (1:26)
The Challenge of Interpreting Scientific Theories (7:45)
Prediction and Truth: Lessons from Ptolemy (10:37)
Prediction and Truth: Lessons from the Kinetic Theory of Gases (10:20)
Test Yourself: "Fact vs Theory vs Hypothesis vs Law ... Explained!"
Assignment: Critique a 7 Minute Video on the Vocabulary of Science (1:54)
Part 1: The Motivation For the Video (3:35)
Part 2: "Scales of Truthiness" (0:57)
Part 3: The Fundamental Error (1:25)
Part 4: The Problem With Defining Facts In Terms of Observations (1:26)
Part 5: Problems with Defining Hypotheses as Starting Points For Inquiry (1:51)
Part 6: Problems With Defining Theories as Well-Supported (2:03)
Part 7: Problems with Defining Evolution as an Observable Fact (2:51)
Part 8: Problems with Defining Laws in Terms of Observations (2:59)
Part 9: Can Laws Explain, or Do They Just Describe? Kepler, Newton and Einstein (5:19)
Part 10: Analyzing the Last Slide (2:02)
Part 11: Who is to Blame? (1:35)
Why is Science Literacy Important, and How Should We Teach It?
Introduction to the Videos in This Section
Why Most People (Even People with PhDs in Science) are Scientifically Illiterate (16:00)
A Curriculum For Teaching Genuine Science Literacy: Overview (1:50)
The Logic of Science (3:15)
The Methods of Science (9:31)
The Landscape of Science (8:22)
The Ethics of Science (10:17)
What's Next?
What's Next? (1:25)
Part 11: Who is to Blame?
Lesson content locked
If you're already enrolled,
you'll need to login
Enroll in Course to Unlock


text:
As a CENTURY 21 New Millennium real estate professional, I am dedicated to providing you with the highest quality service possible. My personal knowledge of the local real estate market is combined with the power of the CENTURY 21® brand—the most recognized name in real estate today.
Let me assist you in finding your dream home in a neighborhood that is right for you and in the price range you want. Or, if you are interested in selling a property, I have a marketing plan to help you get the fastest sale possible and at the best price.
I look forward to the opportunity to work for you!


text:
East Texas School Teachers Now Carrying Loaded Weapons [POLL]
Starting today (October 18), some employees of the Huntington Independent School District in Lufkin, Texas will be carrying loaded weapons on campus.
The Huntington ISD board passed the policy allowing staff members to carry guns back in March, with an effective date of October 18, 2013.
Superintendent Eric Wright said the board approved the new policy in response to the fatal shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn., in December. Twenty children and six adults were killed in that incident.
Wright goes on to say that before school district employees were allowed to carry weapons on campus they were required to have their concealed carry permits and underwent several training programs that included a firearms proficiency test, a psychological evaluation, an active shooter class and a firearms safety course.
District officials will not be releasing the names of the armed employees.
What do you think? Should more school districts allow teachers to carry weapons? Answer in the poll below and leave a comment with your thoughts.


text:
Contact Us
Got a question for us? Comment or concern? Let us know and we'll address it as soon as possible. Open communication is the best thing for a relationship and we want all of our customers to have the best possible experience while using our dating service. Just fill out the form below, and hit send.
Rather give us a call? You can reach our Customer Service at +1-888-593-2077.


text:
Are nutritionists covered by health insurance?
Nutrition counseling can be a critical component of good health care, especially for people recently diagnosed with diabetes or high cholesterol who need to adhere to a specific diet. People also meet with nutritionists for help developing a healthy vegetarian or vegan diet, developing an eating plan to lose weight or gain muscle, or improving their sports performance by changing their diet. Nutritionists may be covered by health insurance depending on your reason for meeting with them. Nutrition counseling is more likely to be covered if it is part of a doctor-prescribed treatment for a particular medical condition, such as diabetes, obesity, high blood pressure or coronary heart disease. For example, Medicare covers medical nutrition therapy services only for people diagnosed with diabetes or kidney disease, as long as they get a referral from their doctor. Also, insurance providers more often cover nutrition visits if the patient has been referred to a registered dietitian within the carrier's network of providers. Insurance plans vary greatly, so research your benefits before visiting a nutritionist.
How much does a nutritionist cost?
A nutritionist provides expertise and guidance to help clients with all diet-related health matters, including losing weight, gaining muscle, improving their sports performance, and managing diabetes or high cholesterol. Nutritionists can help people learn to follow special diets in a healthy way, such as becoming vegetarian or vegan or developing a low-sodium or gluten-free eating plan. The average national cost of a nutritionist is $60 to $100. Nutritionists often require an initial consultation with a new client, during which they'll take a medical history, assess the client's nutritional needs, and determine the best course of action; this first meeting usually averages $100-$120 for a 45-minute to 90-minute consultation. Subsequent nutritional counseling sessions generally cost less, ranging from an average of $45 for a half-hour session to $60-$90 for a one-hour session. Like many professional service providers, nutritionists may offer discounts through package pricing. For instance, a one-month package with two sessions and email support costs an average of $190; a three-month package with three sessions and email support costs an average of $360; and a six-month package with six sessions and email support costs an average of $540.


text:
What is a Real Estate Business? A real estate business helps people buy, sell, or lease properties. Best Ideas for Real Estate Businesses. At list 5 great real estate business ideas to get you started. 1) Real Estate Agent 2) Real Estate Brokerage 3) Real Estate Marketer 4) Real Estate Investor 5) Real Estate Developers. India's economy has grown rapidly in recent years and is expected to continue to do so in 2023. Real estate experts estimate that the growing base of aspirational consumers and their lifestyle changes will drive demand for premium properties in the coming year.
By 2040, real estate market will grow to Rs. 65,000 crore (US$ 9.30 billion) from Rs. 12,000 crore (US$ 1.72 billion) in 2019. Real estate sector in India is expected to reach US$ 1 trillion in market size by 2030, up from US$ 200 billion in 2021 and contribute 13% to the country's GDP by 2025. Retail, hospitality, and commercial real estate are also growing significantly, providing the much-needed infrastructure for India's growing needs.
Get My Ghar is one of the fastest-growing real estate marketing companies in Kolkata because we provide our customers with all their needs and wants at prices that they can afford. We specialize in the best homes at affordable prices (2bhk flat in sunrise aura).We provide our clients with all the options and services that they need. We have dream designs for villas, apartments, and flats. We have homes from 1bhk – 6bhk layout. Our team of professionals is one of the best in the industry and their skills range from property management to marketing and customer relations.


text:
The Manitoba Child Care Association (MCCA) is a non-profit, membership-funded, non-partisan organization incorporated in 1974. Our mission is to advocate for a quality system of child care, to advance early learning and child care education as a profession, and provide services to our members.
MCCA's vision is to promote and support an exceptional early learning and child care system by fueling our members to be proud and excited to belong to a progressive, respected profession.
Copyright 2024, Manitoba Child Care Association


text:
Are you curious on the WOZ value in Winneweer, in the Groningenmunicipality? At WOZ Waardeloket you can easily check your WOZ value.
Do you believe your WOZ value is set too high? Appeal easily within five minutes by using our service free of charge by clicking here . Our experienced lawyers will plead your case with the municipality. Any questions? Do not hesitate to contact us. .
Winneweer municipality Groningen. This municipality has a population of 233.273 people and has 136.196 objects with a WOZ value. The total WOZ value of these objects is € 35.730 million and the average WOZ value is € 252.000. This is an increase of 18.2% compared to last year.
The date municipality Groningen and therefore Winneweer sends out the tax bill is around 25-2-2023. In this period all homeowners will receive their tax bill for the council taxes.
If you believe that your WOZ value is set too high, you can appeal easily within five minutes by using our service, completely free of charge, by clicking here . Want to read more about WOZ first before appealing? Click here for more information or check out our WOZ-wiki. The information from this page originates from the Waarderingskamer.
For the analysis of the Groningen municipality, we have used the streets from Winneweer .


text:
This work by Vincent van Gogh will be reproduced as a Giclée with an advanced 12-color printer spraying the pigment-based inks on canvas or paper, layer by layer.
Because of this large color gamut and the high resolution the original work is closely approximated.
The applied pigment-based inks are UV resistant, which avoids discoloration. The colors will remain beautiful and so we can give an unlimited guarantee!
Vincent van Gogh – Wheatfield under Thunderclouds
Wheatfield under Thunderclouds
Auvers-sur-Oise, july 1890
With your purchase you also support the
Van Gogh Museum


text:
The WordPress.com stats helper monkeys prepared a 2012 annual report for this blog.
Here's an excerpt:
600 people reached the top of Mt. Everest in 2012. This blog got about 3,200 views in 2012. If every person who reached the top of Mt. Everest viewed this blog, it would have taken 5 years to get that many views.
Click here to see the complete report.
Categories: Blogging


text:
When does foreclosure begin?
Lenders will initiate foreclosure proceedings when borrowers become delinquent in their mortgage obligations, usually after three payments are missed. The lender will then notify the borrower in writing that he or she is in default. The lender can request a trustee's sale or a judicial foreclosure, in which the property is sold at public auction. A borrower can cure the default by paying the overdue amount and the pending payment after the notice of default is recorded, usually no later than a few days before the property's sale. Some sales allow the successful bidder to take possession of the property immediately. If the former owner refuses to vacate the premises, the court can issue an unlawful detainer that allows the sheriff to come out and evict them. Borrowers should do everything they can to avoid foreclosure, which is one of the most damaging events that can occur in an individual's credit history.
How long do bankruptcies and foreclosures stay on a credit report?
Bankruptcies and foreclosures can remain on a credit report for seven to ten years. Some lenders will consider a borrower earlier if they have reestablished good credit. The circumstances surrounding the bankruptcy can also influence a lender's decision. For example, if you went through a bankruptcy because your employer had financial difficulties, a lender may be more sympathetic. If, however, you went through a bankruptcy because you overextended personal credit lines and lived beyond your means, the lender probably will be less inclined to be flexible.
Can a home seller sell a home for less than its mortgage?
Yes, in some case you can sell your home for less than what you still owe on the mortgage, but this is complicated and depends on the lender. This situation is known as a "short sale." Sometimes a lender will be willing to split the difference between the sale price and loan amount, which must still be paid. A short sale may be more complicated if the loan has been sold to the secondary market, because then the lender will have to get permission from Freddie Mac, the two major secondary-market players. If the loan was a low-down payment mortgage with private mortgage insurance, then the lender also must involve the mortgage insurance company that insured the low-down loan.
How does a home go into foreclosure?
Foreclosure proceedings usually begin after a borrower has skipped three mortgage payments. The lender will record a notice of default against the property. Unless the debt is satisfied, the lender will foreclose on the mortgage and proceed to set up a trustee sale.
How does someone sell a slow mover?
Even in a down market, real estate experts say that price and condition are the two most important factors in selling a home. If you are selling in a slow market, your first step would be to lower your price. Also, go through the house and see if there are cosmetic defects that you missed and can be repaired. Secondly, you need to make sure that the home is getting the exposure it deserves through open houses, broker open houses, advertising, good signage, and listings on the local multiple listing service (MLS) and on the Internet. Another option is to pull your house off the market and wait for the market to improve. Finally, if you who have no equity in the house, and are forced to sell because of a divorce or financial considerations, you could discuss a short sale or a deed-in-lieu-of-foreclosure with your lender. A short sale is when the seller finds a buyer for a price that is below the mortgage amount and negotiates the difference with the lender. In a deed-in-lieu-of-foreclosure situation, the lender agrees to take the house back without instituting foreclosure proceedings. The latter are radical options. Your simplest, and in many cases most effective, option is to lower the price.


text:
Hotel Name
Restaurant, Taverna, Cafe and Bar directory for Greece
Hotel Name
GreekHotels > Restaurants and Bars
New Service
We have been supplying
information for car and
bike-rentals since April 2007.
Our aim is for our pages to
provide all the necessary
information you are expecting
by the end of 2024.
Exact, partial, brief, paraphrased or adapted reproduction or republication of the contents and design of this website by any means
mechanical, electronic, photocopied or otherwise without previous authorisation from the legal owner is strictly forbidden.
Copyright © 1994 - 2024 www.greekhotels.gr (KAVI CLUB S.A. - Travel Services in Greece)
Find your hotel.
Type the name, select from the list and click go.


text:
ProductsChairsLounge chairsSofasOffice chairsChaises longuesStools & benchesSculpturesConference chairsAirport seatingStorage spaceMicro architectureDining tablesCafé tablesCoffee & side tablesDesksOffice furniture systemsConference systemsLightingClocksDecorative objectsCoat racks & wall shelvesTrays & vesselsAlexander Girard Antonio CitterioCharles & Ray Eames Barber OsgerbyGeorge NelsonHella JongeriusIsamu NoguchiJasper MorrisonJean ProuvéKonstantin GrcicRonan & Erwan BouroullecVerner PantonJulie RichozCare & repairCare productsManufacturer warrantyNewBestsellerGift finderOffice chair finderLounge chair finderColour & materialMikadoColour Frame MirrorsInspirationsLiving roomDining roomHome OfficeChildren's roomOutdoorHome StoriesAugmented RealityWorkspaceFocusMeetingWorkshopClub OfficeCitizen OfficeStudio OfficeDynamic SpacesHospitalityAirportsEducationCo-WorkingHealthcareOur ClientsHome StoriesAugmented Reality - bring Vitra products into your homeA case for classicsColour & materialAn open house A leading space for a leading art collegeHigh comfort of low energyAn office landscape - without walls or partitionsServicesCare & repairSpare partsCare productsManufacturer warrantyFAQ and contactInstructionsInstructions for earlier productsConsulting & Planning StudioConsulting & planning in the VitraHausOutdoor care instructionsRepair, maintenance, overhaul at the Vitra Circle Store Campus ProfessionalsCAD dataProduct factsheetsCertificatesBrochuresSustainability reportInstructionsEcology informationpConPlanning examplesColour & Material LibraryCertificates and standardsTo the dealer loginOur ClientsMikadoTyde 2 on castorsACXDancing OfficeOffice chairsMagazineStoriesConversationsExhibitionsDesignerProject VitraVitraHaus Loft - A conversation with Sabine MarcelisKhudi BariWalking the talkA 1000 m2 piece of furnitureShaping the future of energyFrom a toy to an objectWhat would nature doWhy design classics remain relevant, even in the officeA studio visit with Tsuyoshi TaneThe Eames Collection at the Vitra Design MuseumMoments in architectureAbout the partnership between Eames and VitraThe Eames La ChaiseSaul SteinbergTane Garden HouseWhat would Charles and Ray say?The Maison Jean ProuvéThe OriginalVitra CampusExhibitionsGuided tours & workshopsFood and drinkShoppingActivities for familiesArchitectureYour eventPlan your visitVitra Campus appCampus EventsNewsVitraHausVitra Design MuseumVitra SchaudepotVitra Circle Store CampusOudolf GartenAbout VitraSustainabilityJobs & CareersDesign processThe Original is by VitraHistory - Project Vitra
Do you need help with a project?
The Vitra Consulting & Planning Studio offers consultancy services and tools to assist partners, decision-makers and employees in rethinking their offices and transforming them into future-proof workspaces.
More details


text:
TravPR.com offers an advanced SEO & Social Media press release distribution service for the global travel industry.
TravPR.com provides immediate exposure for your company news in the major search engines, social media sites & news portals.
Get your release in Google News, Google Search, Bing, Yahoo, Facebook, Twitter, Google +, Digg plus many other social media sites, travel blogs & news portals.
Our new Media Pro Service offers direct distribution of your news to thousands of key travel trade press, travel magazines & national newspaper travel editors in the USA, UK, Canada, Australia & New Zealand.


text:
Before you get life insurance coverage, you should understand why you need it. While there are many reasons to buy life insurance, the most common reasons include:
- Final expenses: Final expenses refer to any expenses related to someone's passing. This can include a casket, funeral, preparations, memorial service, cremation and more. Life insurance for final expenses is worth considering—after all, the National Funeral Directors Association reports that the median price of a funeral with a casket is around $7,850. Families without enough funds are forced to cut back on the service or ask friends and family for donations. Some families have turned to crowdfunding to help cover the cost. A modest term life insurance policy can unburden your loved ones by taking care of these expenses.
- Income replacement: Your loved ones depend on your income to meet daily needs for food, medical care, utilities, car payments and much more. There are also future costs like a child's college education or contributions you would have made toward a surviving spouse's retirement. If you pass away without a means for replacing your income, their standard of living could be in serious jeopardy. Having a life insurance policy in place can help provide financial security and the ability to maintain your current lifestyle (especially if you stay home with young children). How much life insurance you need is based on two factors: your salary and the number of years until you retire. An insurance agent will also account for any other factors such as Social Security benefits, your partner's income, your debt and your savings. Always aim to buy the amount you really need—but also remember that something is better than nothing when it comes to life insurance coverage. (Spoiler alert: it's more affordable than you may think!)
- Paying off a mortgage: A mortgage is often the biggest single line item in a person's budget. Could your family afford your home's mortgage without your paycheck in the picture? If not, an already sad situation would be compounded by the family possibly losing the house they love. This could also mean your children could no longer attend a school in their current district or maintain the friendships they currently have. Life insurance can pay off an outstanding mortgage so your family can enjoy the home they love without the burden of outstanding payments.
These are the three most common reasons people purchase life insurance. Yet there are many other reasons for buying life insurance, such as building or leaving an inheritance, saving for retirement, protecting student loan co-signers and more.
Life Insurance=Love Insurance
February is Insure Your Love month and the campaign is coordinated each year by Life Happens. Make sure to connect with us today to insure your love with life insurance.
Life Happens is a nonprofit organization dedicated to helping consumers take personal financial responsibility through the ownership of life insurance and related products. Life Happens Pro furthers its mission of educating the public by making its resources customizable and putting them directly into the hands of agents.
ERIE® insurance products and services are provided by one or more of the following insurers: Erie Insurance Exchange, Erie Insurance Company, Erie Insurance Property & Casualty Company, Flagship City Insurance Company and Erie Family Life Insurance Company (home offices: Erie, Pennsylvania) or Erie Insurance Company of New York (home office: Rochester, New York). The companies within the Erie Insurance Group are not licensed to operate in all states. Refer to the company licensure and states of operation information.
The insurance products and rates, if applicable, described in this blog are in effect as of July 2022 and may be changed at any time.
Insurance products are subject to terms, conditions and exclusions not described in this blog. The policy contains the specific details of the coverages, terms, conditions and exclusions.
The insurance products and services described in this blog are not offered in all states. ERIE life insurance and annuity products are not available in New York. ERIE Medicare supplement products are not available in the District of Columbia or New York. ERIE long term care products are not available in the District of Columbia and New York.
Eligibility will be determined at the time of application based upon applicable underwriting guidelines and rules in effect at that time.
Your ERIE agent can offer you practical guidance and answer questions you may have before you buy.
A better insurance experience starts with ERIE.
Haven't heard of us? Erie Insurance started with humble beginnings in 1925 with a mission to emphasize customer service above all else. Though we've grown to reach the Fortune 500 list, we still haven't lost the human touch.
Contact Trent Insurance Agency today to experience the ERIE difference for yourself.