But monkeys luuuve porn!
And thus so do I.
Steve Jobs' App Store for Apple's famous iOS devices - the iPhone, iPad et al - is no stranger to controversy lately. The company has been happy to take a firm and positive stance on various issues, weeding from its lucrative walled garden any dissenting program. Now, Apple has taken a stance which will upset a lot of …
And thus so do I.
Given the "supposed" origin of the AIDS virus, obviously, more than a few humans have been loving those porn loving monkeys ....
"There's people on the street getting diseases from monkeys
Yeah that's what I said, their getting diseases from monkeys
Whys this happening, please, whose been touching these monkeys
Leave these poor sick monkeys alone
There sick, they've got problems enough as it is."
Yepp, we share much with our distant cousins -- like the ability and willingness to chuck our feces at others.
What!? C'mon, i'm not the only one.
I thought you guys were a little more up to date with this. Perhaps you would like to read The Origin of the species by Charles Darwin which contains the theory of Natural selection first published in 1859
So what stance is Apple taking here? Allowing the publishing of evolution theory as put forth by Charles Darwin. oh tsk tsk naughty Apple
...is wrong with some of the posters here.
It's a jokey article, gently mocking both Apple and the US 'controversy' of evolution vs. Creationism (which Brits - in general - find pretty amusing and a little bit scary).
Get over yourselves, please.
Trust me, Marky W, us americans ( USA folks, more specifically ) find the whole creationist/ID argument more than a little scary. It's downright terrifying to many of us that, in this day and age, we find ourselves having these mid-evil arguments.
Any day I expect the "flat earth" argument to make a comeback.
matter of fact Darwin still beleived in God and creation. He viewed evolution as an ongoing process which God started off. Modern evolution theory is as similar to Darwin as an i7 quad core is to Babbage's analytical engine
... for lending some balance here! It seems this debate is more centred around those who are anti- 'any creationist' or anti- 'any evolutionary theory' ... and should not really be a debate except for the press and some populist authors choosing to represent the extreme views as it gets more hits. Full marks to Apple for allowing observable theories to be made public - that in my mind,are a very different issue to pornography which is a moral issue. Still, Saint jobs is a curious fellow as not many corporates even bother with morality unless it is might get them sued.
It is not the case that Darwin still had strong religious beleiefs after the publication of the Origin of Species. His faith was strongly shaken by the deaths of his beloved youngest daughter. He did temper his scepticism in public as his wife was highly religious and this distressed her.
The following extract from his autobiography best expresses his views later in life. It should be noted that some of the wording was changed
The first version of the autobiography was edited (more accurately, censored), to protect the religious feelings of his widow Emma. The original content was restored by his grand daughter in 1958.
It's safe to say that, later in life, whilst Charles Darwin was not an out-and-out fundamentalist atheist in denying the possibility of any god, he was by now means convinced that one existed (or that creation was necessary). After all, at that point in time, there was no real evidence of a Universe with a defined beginning. Consensus on that wasn't reached until the 1950s/60s.
It's actually called "On the Origin of Species", not "The Origin of THE Species". So many people get that wrong.
Darwin was born into a religious family, as were most back in the day, he even studied at a seminary and followed religion until later in his life when he found it harder and harder to maintian that religion in the face of all the scientific research he was conducting. Now I'm not saying he didn't believe in God at some point but later in his life he did renounce God and christianity. So to say that he viewed evolution as a process which God started is just not the case.
You know, I was talking to God about Darwin the other day ... the reply was odd ... "Charles WHO?"
Not however, a Christian on. They were Unitarians.
"Modern evolution theory is as similar to Darwin as an i7 quad core is to Babbage's analytical engine"
We, as a species, progress our technology and our knowledge with each passing generation. I thought that would be obvious.
Unitarianism is a Christian theology.
as anyone who's ever seen this <http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-4860483760049380308#> can say. Why some of us are _still_ monkeys.
Dance, monkey boy, dance.
Some things never get old.
Well, so is gravity.
"Apple has taken a stance which will upset a lot of Americans"
It's hardly Apple's fault that the truth upsets people.
I for one will not rest until the science of "Intelligent Falling" is taught in every Kansas schoolhouse.
At least Kansas voted out all the school board members who were pushing intelligent design in the class. Although it still does amaze me that school board members don't have to have any credentials to be such.
Yes, but the Register article was merely being heavily sarcastic here, noting that this seemed to be an exception to Apple's usual policy, which seems to be to ban everything which might offend anyone. And, sadly, in the United States, there are a lot of people who take issue with evolution.
I upvoted you, because I'm on the side of the rationally sane, but I have to point out your error - Gravity is NOT a theory, it's a LAW ;)
Has Apple had any complaints? The article doesn't mention any. Theres no reason to think that creationists would be woefully upset at this app; they just think that Darwinist evolution is wrong rather than being unspeakably horrible. Enough hyperbole for a Tuesday afternoon.
That Darwinian evolution in no way excludes the activities of powerful agencies has failed to penetrate the mind of creationists and ID'ers and means that reason has little to do with their grumpiness. (Of course such spoiling for a fight could have been headed-off had our bronze age ancestors managed to write-up a nice parable or two on the concept of imaginary friends having imaginary powers and imagined histories where time can mean whatever you want... ah well).
Get enough complaints arriving and Apple will ban anything.
> Theres no reason to think that creationists would be woefully upset at this app.
Clearly you do not follow this sort of thing.
Sigh. The Vatican pretty much abandoned it's previous hostility to science when the Spanish Inquisition ended. There may still be a few nuts left who take Psalm 93 literally: "The world is firmly established; it cannot be moved." to mean that the sun goes around the earth, and presumably that the latter is flat. But please don't confuse Christians with brains (you'll find some in most denominations) with the other sort. There is a spectrum of intellectual capacity in relation to any faith position including those who claim not to have one.
Using aggressive miss-infomation. Even the pope is not a creationist, and most creationists are not catholic.
I believe he went a bit beyond "aggressive". The word he used to describe despicable humanists (how dare they subscribe to equality for and understanding of all people, who do they think they are... Jesus?!) rhymed with "Nah" and "Zee".
And of course the Pope is quite correct, and I'd write more, but I've Priests in me industrial ovens to sort; those gold fillings won't collect themselves.
"Fucked by a man made God"
Quality. Undoubtedly comment of the day! :-)
does the pope shit in the woods?
Umm... What? Until Apple rejects an app advocating creationism by stating creationism is rubbish, they can't be said to be taking sides. Allowing something into a marketplace is not the same thing as endorsing its contents. Only the stupid think that not wholeheartedly advocating one side means advocating its opposite.
Fundamentalist Christian : Well... God put them there to test our faith.
Bill : I'm glad I'm strapped into this chair coz it looks like God put you here to test my faith dude!!!
Have you ever noticed how all creationists look... unevolved.
Fundamentalist Christian : I believe that god created me in 7 days.
Bill : Yup... it looks like he rushed it.
And he also explains why no one will get upset over this, the creationists in Dumbfuckistan are still waiting to evolve their thumbs and so can't use iOS based technology ;)
The Earth is round
The Earth orbits the Sun
There is only so much oil
The Moon is not made of Cheese
Fire is hot
There are many other countries
I know the Apple Fans must have their apps, and you don't get to however many million it is in the app store by restricting it to useful ones.
But quite why you'd want an app that tells you the bleedin obvious, I'm not sure.
*On the grounds of aiding and abetting terrorism and making the world a dangerous place.
She did say "masturbation and all other forms of lustful behaviour outside marriage are sinful" but she was at high school when she said it.
I wonder if the proposed free schools will allow children to be taught creationism as science?
Why can't we just have a National Curriculum and make everyone study it. Religion should be something you do at home...like masturbation!
Paris...I'd study her at home.
"She did say "masturbation and all other forms of lustful behaviour outside marriage are sinful" but she was at high school when she said it."
No, she was not at high school at the time. She didn't choose the paths of righteousness until she'd indulged her appetite for the pleasures of the flesh for several years. Rumours that it was because "those beastly fraternity guys never call me in the morning, but the voice in my head does" could not be confirmed at the time of writing.
Paris, O'Donnell - one enjoys sex and the other is a liar.
Having begun it, I felt obliged to read it all the way to the end, simply in order to feel qualified to say that I really must find something more interesting to read, during my coffee breaks.
The actual App, itself - from Penn State University - sounds quite interesting, but apparently the real "IT angle" is that the app store is run by control freaks, and there's a mad American in the US senate. This is 'news', apparently. God I wish I'd got a job in 'news': it looks much more fun than deciphering some long-departed contractors bloody .NET program...
Anyway, before I go back to that, I'm off to read about the app: http://live.psu.edu/story/48526
(I suspect this one will keep Sarah Bee busy - but I rather imagine there's no "'Sarah Bee' in 'Team Register'".)
Quick! Clap your hands and say "I do believe in Sarah Bee!"
"Non-story" was the exact phrase I was about to use. Let's summarise:
* App is created.
* Some people believe it isn't the truth.
* Apple doesn't take a view on whether it does or not.
Bad Reg! And not even a chance of slapping Apple down.
Every time you say you don't believe in Sarah, a bee dies.
I'm very disappointed with the reg for publishing non-stories like these. I would use much harsher language, but since about 1 in 10 posts actually get through... Let me just say that some insects shouldn't be allowed in a serious news organization, or a humorous news organization or a news organization or any organization for that matter, because these insects suck the fun of out of it and leave a shallow feeling of fun-less emptiness...
Evolution IS no more than a "theory". But scientifically, that places it at least two rungs higher than creationism or "Intelligent Design" which are both no more than "philosophies".
Specifically, it has been formulated in such a way that can be experimentally and statistically tested (hypothesis), and those tests have shown that it generally agrees with the available observational evidence (theory).
And, lest you believe that this particular mental non sequitur is limited to the States:
Despite what these types of people might think, "theory" doesn't mean that we're just guessing, it means that this explanation conforms to all of our current understanding of the phenomena.
I always laugh when people say "evolution/gravity/cake is just a theory", because they're right, just not in the way they think.
Evolution is a theory supported by overwhelming evidence and it is also a fact.
Human beings can cause animals to evolve by selective breeding. Wild populations have also been observed to evolve, for example because of predation by introduced animals.
The evidence for evolution is compelling. The only question that remains of creationists is whether they are ignorant or willfully ignorant to disregard it when there is absolutely no evidence of any kind to support creationism. It is a non theory since it predicts nothing or accounts for anything. Claiming "god did it" is the ultimate cop out.
Finally, a proper use of the egghead symbol and a well-reasoned, but lucid explanation of the situation. Post of the week.
CAKE IS NOT A THEORY!
(sorry, was I shouting?)