Disqus - Latest Comments for brooksgarrett

Re: DISQUS 3 Embraces OpenID

danielmiessler — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 22:47:51 -0000

Indeed.

Re: DISQUS 3 Embraces OpenID

brooksgarrett — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 21:22:53 -0000

Well that *IS* spiffy!

Re: Moderate vs. Extremist Religion

Steve — Sat, 23 May 2009 18:39:09 -0000

The incredible hypocrisy is that the some Christians will let this woman allow a child die in the name of "supporting her right to her beliefs" but then venomently oppose a woman who chooses to give up an unborn child.

The first amendment gives freedom of religion and religious practices, but should not trump the sanctity of life or the rights of another, even their own child. Blood transfusions and Jehovah's Witness has been a great example of this.

A further removed example of this, but illuminating the slippery slope of a unchecked "freedom of religion" rules with no boundaries or limits would justify the moral police that locked the young girls in the burning school preventing firefighters and fathers from saving the girls from a excruciating death because they were "not properly covered" to be seen and therefore rescued.

The inquisition, execution of heretics and supposed witches, persecution of scientists the contradicied the church's ignorant beliefs, where does the lines stop on the slippery slope of "freedom of religion"

Simply unbelievable and inexcusable in a civilized world and reminisced of the dark ages.

Re: Moderate vs. Extremist Religion

brooksgarrett — Fri, 15 May 2009 09:28:56 -0000

While a well made point it is rendered invalid.

One person with the belief that he needs to kill everyone of different beliefs is a kook and can be controlled.

What do you do when 1 Billion people all share this same belief "consistently"?

Re: Moderate vs. Extremist Religion

brooksgarrett — Mon, 11 May 2009 10:50:45 -0000

I agree in part and disagree with part.

I agree with you that fundamental radicalism (or in this case extremist religion) is harmful and should be derided much as you would slap the child eating poison because it looks like candy.

I disagree with you that this situation is anything resembling a moderate stance in faith.

A moderate stance is "We should pray the medicine works and place our faith in God." This is acceptable. Science can not reliably explain why the same treatment will not work on two similar people with similar conditions. Thus the person is using faith to fill in the gaps. I see no harm in that.

An extreme stance is "No medicine. God will handle it." One of the most oft quoted verses from scripture is "God helps those who help themselves." I could understand the argument, "No medicine. There is a .00928 % success rate and a 90% chance it will only decrease his life experience." That is a valid argument based on promoting the greater good of the child.

While I DO think the courts should uphold the parent's wishes (Damn the First Amendment!), I do think they should be ridiculed and ostracized throughout their lives for sacrificing their son in this manner.

Re: This Guy Just Made Me Love This Song

brooksgarrett — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:45:05 -0000

Rediscovering internet meme's today?

Re: Insanely Fast Clip Change

brooksgarrett — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 07:08:18 -0000

And the teacher gets schooled!

Another nice catch, I always got the two confused. In our course, the instructor wanted us to maintain control of ALL mag's as a matter of habit, especially considering that is what the IDPA competition rules require.

Re: Insanely Fast Clip Change

Doc Rice — Sat, 18 Apr 2009 01:10:51 -0000

I think you're referring to a tactical reload where you release a mag that still has ammunition in it, catch it with the other hand while inserting a new one, and pocketing / holstering the old mag. A combat reload is where you drop the mag and insert a fresh one as soon as the old one is out of the well.

Or, at least this is what I remember from a defensive pistol course I took a while back.

Re: Insanely Fast Clip Change

brooksgarrett — Fri, 17 Apr 2009 13:59:30 -0000

Doc Rice beat me to it. That is not a "Clip Change."

That is a reload. He is switching magazines. I would be more impressed if he did this as a combat reload where instead of dropping his empty mag, he instead maintained control and possession of it.

Semantics I know, but I want you to be as technically correct as possible Mr. Miessler.

Re: Are the Religious More Logical Than I Think?

cooperati — Wed, 08 Apr 2009 01:43:25 -0000

I tip my hat to you, sir.

(It can be a fun debate.)

-=T=-

Re: Are the Religious More Logical Than I Think?

brooksgarrett — Tue, 07 Apr 2009 09:07:05 -0000

Big disagreement here Daniel.

It is still Christianity. It is not Baptist, Pentecostal, etc... Christianity is the belief in Jesus Christ as the chosen prophet of the One true God. All the rest of the details of how, when, and in what way worship is performed is left to the many denominations.

I believe you'll find many people (myself included) who have adjusted their religious beliefs and rules to fit their world view. I started Baptist and wound up somewhere over here.

To your previous argument I would ask you to judge me. Am I irrational, illogical, or prone to flights of fantasy due to my belief in a God? Be honest, I can take criticism.

To sum it all up: Cooperati, CarlM, and yourself have had a stellar debate that I have thouroughly enjoyed reading. Yet what I am taking from this is not that Religion is inherently bad (though one could argue I'm a bit biased).

Rather the problem is fundamentalist, non-critical thinking. People who accept inputs without sanitizing the data are just as dangerous as a Database that does the same thing. The data gets all corrupted in other parts of the system. The question is not "How do we stop religion?"; the question is "How do we build a generation of critical thinkers who take the best parts of inputs and apply them while disregarding the garbage?"

To me, a person who fundamentally believes everything they hear is much more dangerous listening to Bill O'Reilly than their local preacher. YMMV.

Re: The Steam, Water, and Ice of Messaging: What Are the Real Differences Between Communication Mediums?

brooksgarrett — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 12:27:31 -0000

I was considering this topic the other day when I looked through Google Voice.

Imagine iptables level control over your inputs. Hold and transcribe my inputs from Work, yet patch through all personal calls; unless I'm in private mode. Glad to see someone else sees the value in this idea!

I'm liking your vision of the future, and I'm sure Godgle (Misspell intended) will be at the helm.

Re: “Not Cool Enough to be a Mac Person…”

brooksgarrett — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 23:48:06 -0000

Now if someone will kindly just port Quicksilver (not a clone) and TextMate over to Windows?

kthxbai =)

Re: “Not Cool Enough to be a Mac Person…”

danielrm26 — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:46:25 -0000

Ugh.

You'd have a good argument in my book if you could run OS X on that hardware, or if you ran Linux on your box. But Vista as a primary OS I just couldn't do.

But to each his own. It's just a tool at the end of the day, and what really matters is what you make with it.

Re: Obama, You’re Disappointing Me a Bit

danielrm26 — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:44:50 -0000

I'm hoping he's just overwhelmed and that he'll right himself later this year. You have to admit that he's dealing with a LOT right now.

Re: “Not Cool Enough to be a Mac Person…”

brooksgarrett — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:30:41 -0000

Oddly my Vista Laptop (Dell Vostro 1400) has had ZERO problems. I run games, code, convert video, synch my iPhone, surf the web, download, and manage my network. No problems. Keep your MacBook iSpentWayTooMuch hardware.

I'm Brooks Garrett, and I'm a PC.

Re: Obama, You’re Disappointing Me a Bit

brooksgarrett — Fri, 27 Mar 2009 13:28:37 -0000

The most change we have seen in Washington is in Obama.

I think honestly he is indeed an empty suit with no clue what he is doing. These "Town Halls" and other feel good P.R. activities make the average Joe feel plugged in, yet Obama's responses prove that these activities are at the end of the day just publicity stunts.

I just hope the Country can survive four years and we get another elections where we get to choose the lesser of two evils and ride this coaster again.

Re: The Pope is Evil

brooksgarrett — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 15:35:22 -0000

Well postulated.

So then, the Pope's decree that illness was NOT caused by small unobservable life forms was superior to the claim that bacteria causes illness?

Neither side had a shred of evidence at the time and belief in some invisible death machine was very silly indeed.

Further, the idea of a "God" particle (ie Higgs-Boson) is quite silly to me. It can only be observed through assumption, is completely experimental in nature, and has yet to even be proven to exist. Yet, this particle is supposed to "explain how massless elementary particles can have mass" (Wikipedia, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson).

Sounds like a bunch of bullocks to me, I say it is OUTRAGEOUS, and thus my claim is superior and correct.

Re: The Pope is Evil

danielrm26 — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 14:37:43 -0000

Outrageous Beliefs Are Not Equal to Claims They Are False
http://dmiessler.com/blog/outrageous-beliefs-ar...

Re: The Pope is Evil

brooksgarrett — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 11:17:54 -0000

You forget one important guiding principal.

The First Amendment to the United States Consitution.

If our founding fathers (the majority of which were admittedly pagan or of no religious affiliation) recognized the right of people to pursue religious beliefs as they wished, then so be it. It IS personal choice.

Further, to follow this line of thinking whereby we eliminate all destructive behavior, where would that leave us? Many of our greatest technological acheivements are either destroying ourselves or our environment (See the history of Morphine and Penicillin).

Let me close by agreeing that any religious belief can not by definition be based on scientific evidence, and thus is just a belief. Further, I agree that every religion has negative aspects (Crusades anyone?). Therefore I partially agree with you in that we should as a society do our very best to provide sound education to our citizens so that they may make that personal choice with the very best information set.

P.S. What you assert as fact (There is NO God), you can not prove. Nor can the religious community prove the inverse.

Re: GIGO

brooksgarrett — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 11:07:21 -0000

lmao.

Took me a second. I couldn't reconcile GIGO with that image... Then I saw the chairs. Excellent.

Re: A Great Video for Your Creationst Friends

brooksgarrett — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:12:47 -0000

A sensationally rational and well thought response. Thank you for your enlightenment ;-)

Your witty retort changed my life outlook, I'll be converting to atheism in the near future and I can tell all my friends it was thanks to he I call, "Jon!"

Re: A Great Video for Your Creationst Friends

Jon — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:39:39 -0000

and believe in magic

Re: A Great Video for Your Creationst Friends

brooksgarrett — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 11:03:28 -0000

I agree. I still stand by my original argument, My faith is in God as a supreme being; that is the what. Science explains to me the HOW.

In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth (loose English translation), that is the what. How did he do it? Big Bang.

He created first the animals of the sea, then the crawlers, then the birds, then the humans. How? Look to your article.

Science and Religion can co-exist and complement each other perfectly, you just have to open your mind.

Re: A Coffee Primer

danielrm26 — Mon, 02 Mar 2009 15:54:11 -0000

It might be a while, but I'll get there.