Jump to content


thespin's Content

There have been 27 items by thespin (Search limited from 21-March 16)


By content type

See this member's


Sort by                Order  

#1573678 Dfi Global Forum Down ?

Posted by thespin on 11 August 2008 - 05:14 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

Mr Spin, good to see you ... it's been awhile.

Senor Sysgensmyth, it's always nice to see a familiar avatar.

Hope the news from Lake Wobegon is still good - despite escalating problems around the globe, some real, others really fanciful ...



#1573591 Dfi Global Forum Down ?

Posted by thespin on 11 August 2008 - 01:21 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

I get that message too. But I don't have an account.

Somebody mentioned something about them not paying the bills? (Ironic, huh?)

A suspension (by their site host) makes sense of the message ... thanks.



#1573561 Dfi Global Forum Down ?

Posted by thespin on 11 August 2008 - 12:00 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

Has the DFI Global forum been hacked ? I get a web page with only the following:
=======================
This Account Has Been Suspended
Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible.
=======================
Huh??

I am sure I haven't made any posts that would cause my suspension ... I haven't even posted in a couple of weeks, maybe a month.

Is anyone else getting this message ?



#674263 What kind of firewall do you use?

Posted by thespin on 21 March 2007 - 04:00 PM in OCC Weekly Polls

Software: AVG
Hardware: Netopia set to "Silent Running" ... (Dive! Dive!) ...



#674261 Name That Car!

Posted by thespin on 21 March 2007 - 03:57 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

I am guessing some model of Mini ...



#650189 G7 Mouse Rant

Posted by thespin on 19 December 2006 - 07:55 PM in Miscellaneous Hardware

Check mice benchmarks here ... yes, you read it right ...
http://www.esreality...i...5679&page=1



#640820 Best Anti-bose Article I've Seen Yet

Posted by thespin on 16 November 2006 - 01:31 PM in Audio Hardware

C'mon, guy. Not EVERYTHING they make blows. I have been to their store demos and they have high-end systems that are awesome ...



#640275 Windows 98 Se And A Usb Printer

Posted by thespin on 13 November 2006 - 05:52 PM in Miscellaneous Hardware

Does the computer have an integrated USB port ?? I had to buy a PCI slotted USB port for my friends Windows 98 SE computer but the USB ports worked fine after I installed the drivers for it ...



#640268 Any Good Wire Tucking Guides?

Posted by thespin on 13 November 2006 - 05:38 PM in Cases, Power Supplies and Modding

Any extra wires from the PSU I try to tuck into an empty bay. I run some wires behind the motherboard tray (I don't know why the case manufacturers don't provide more space between the tray and the removable side panel) and tape them in place. The wires that you can't hide you sleeve (for molex extensions I buy fancy) ...

Maybe you can get some ideas from these pics. Considering that it has two watercooling circuits, nine internal fans, and 5 lights, it's pretty neat: :0

Posted Image

Posted Image

Posted Image



#640264 Case Mod Idea..

Posted by thespin on 13 November 2006 - 05:21 PM in Miscellaneous Hardware

The next best thing to a PCP&C PSU is this OCZ Gamestream 700W from TigerDirect for $99 shipped (after rebate):
http://www.tigerdire...p;sku=O261-2005



#595991 Case Airflow

Posted by thespin on 12 December 2005 - 06:01 PM in Overclocking and Cooling

I don't know of any positive/negative effects to having positive/negative pressure in the case. The goal is to have adequate or better airflow over all parts that need to be cooled. I try to get air moving as fast as possible front to back with a fan or two over memory and the chipset. And I try to avoid conflicting flow. Cable management (try running most of your wires behind the mobo tray) is also important to having good airflow ...



#595970 Wow, Shakira Blows

Posted by thespin on 12 December 2005 - 05:45 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

Maybe her songs and dancing are lousy, but there is NO ONE ALIVE (NO ONE!!) who can move her body between waist and knee like Shakira. THAT was her great appeal, BELLY DANCING PAR EXCELLENCE. But I think that in the last few years she got a bee up her bonnet about BEING TAKEN SERIOUSLY or JOINING THE MAINSTREAM (opposites I know but I can't figure her out) and started this weird dancing style. Most likely that her boyfriend at the time dumped her and she is going thru "I AM STILL BEAUTIFUL" changes that women do when dumped. Most women go on an anoerexic diet when that happens; Shakira lost her confidence in the sexiness of her belly dancing (I MEAN WOW HERE) and is experimenting ... better a diet ...



#560745 Dfi's Site Not Working For Me

Posted by thespin on 15 October 2005 - 04:54 PM in Programmer's Corner

http://www.dfi.com.tw

Isn't working for me... anyone know where else I can download the latest drivers for the NFII Ultra Infinity?

View Post

The site is back up ...



#560739 How To Punish Your Dog.

Posted by thespin on 15 October 2005 - 04:42 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

I dunue I don't like hitting animals.

View Post

What you did is a crime in many jurisdictions ...



#555223 Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Posted by thespin on 05 October 2005 - 09:52 AM in OCC Member's Lounge

I'm ending this here as I can tell what thespin is trying to do.  He is merely taking whatever he can find on the web and citing the information, although he has no idea what it even means or what purpose it even serves to the discussion, in order to attempt to reduce my answers to a subject, event, or entity that I, or possibly even science, can not yet explain.  He will then attempt to appeal to ignorance claiming that since there is something I, or science, can't explain which he will then claim as a sign of Design.  This is merely a troll tactic that I will not tolerate.  Unless thespin has something to contribute to the discussion of whether ID is a science or not, his posts are merely grasps at straws with no real knowledge of the subject he is refering to.

View Post

Aristotle, stop whining. I understand what I am citing. Among my multiple degrees is one in Chemistry. Nobody is fooled by your transparent claim that you are above it all. The fact is - you have no answer to my arguments and have therefore thrown in the towel - as you should. But be honest about it ...

"If today you hear His Voice, harden not your heart." Psalm 95: 7-8



#555140 Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Posted by thespin on 05 October 2005 - 01:36 AM in OCC Member's Lounge

The argument is merely an appeal to ignorance and is not even entirely accurate in its construction.  Anaerobic organisms are the oldest kinds of bacteria on Earth with clostridium tetani (tetanus) as an example.  Most of the first organisms (bacteria) survived only on gas and light as sustenance.  This violates your original premise that the first organism must first be able to "2) discriminate as to what food it takes in (else it would poison itself)".  The standard of when an organism is actually considered an organism is also arbitrary, existing on a contiuum; however, Evolution does not concern itself with such topics.  Science approaches this subject through a study known as Abiogenesis.

View Post

Actually, I never (or rarely) appeal to ignorance. It's not my style. I love the truth; 'it will set us free.' I try to stimulate thinking and the exchange of ideas hoping that all parties to the discussion will learn something from each other.

The organism, clostridium tetanii, that you propose as an example supporting your argument, actually supports mine much more strongly. Your putting a 'face' on a life form allows me to layout a description of some of the VERY, VERY, VERY COMPLEX structures and processes that exists in even the "simplest" life form:
Cytoplasmic Membrane - A layer of phospholipids and proteins, called the cytoplasmic membrane, encloses the interior of the bacterium, regulating the flow of materials in and out of the cell. This is a structural trait bacteria share with all other living cells; a barrier that allows them to selectively interact with their environment. Membranes are highly organized and asymmetric having two sides, each side with a different surface and different functions. Membranes are also dynamic, constantly adapting to different conditions.
Cell Wall - Each bacterium is enclosed by a rigid cell wall composed of peptidoglycan, a protein-sugar (polysaccharide) molecule. The wall gives the cell its shape and surrounds the cytoplasmic membrane, protecting it from the environment.
Ribosomes are microscopic "factories" found in all cells, including bacteria. They translate the genetic code from the molecular language of nucleic acid to that of amino acids—the building blocks of proteins. Proteins are the molecules that perform all the functions of cells and living organisms.
Cytoplasm - The cytoplasm, or protoplasm, of bacterial cells is where the functions for cell growth, metabolism, and replication are carried out. It is a gel-like matrix composed of water, enzymes, nutrients, wastes, and gases and contains cell structures such as ribosomes, a chromosome, and plasmids. The cell envelope encases the cytoplasm and all its components.
The nucleoid is a region of cytoplasm where the chromosomal DNA is located. It is not a membrane bound nucleus, but simply an area of the cytoplasm where the strands of DNA are found. Most bacteria have a single, circular chromosome that is responsible for replication, although a few species do have two or more. Smaller circular auxiliary DNA strands, called plasmids, are also found in the cytoplasm.

Do you know that it can take us weeks to make proteins (when we can make them at all) that are produced in seconds in these "microscopic factories" ? If man is the standard of intelligence, what does that tell us ? If man for all his vaunted intelligence is just playing catch-up to what already exists in nature (the ability to fly, the ability to live under the oceans, the ability to communicate over long distances, the ability to feed himself etc), can we draw any conclusions ? No ?

I am not a biologist. The above can be found here:
http://micro.magnet....cteriacell.html

I ask again: How could life exist by chance ?



#554644 Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Posted by thespin on 04 October 2005 - 06:54 AM in OCC Member's Lounge

The sources I have posted clearly negate Denton and his arguments. They should not be cast off so lightly.
I am a hard scientist. I know the language of hard science. Denton speaks this language cogently and clearly in his book, Evolution. The article you provide a link to does NOT speak this language. Instead it uses the language of the SOFT SCIENCES: Sociology, Psychology, etc which ARE NOT exact sciences but depend on much guesswork, practical methods, etc. When evolutionists speak the CLEAR LANGUAGE of the hard sciences, I will respectfully listen. But evolutionists CANNOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS: make HARD ASSERTIONS with EXTREMELY SOFT EVIDENTIARY SUPPORT - which hard science debunks.

This is an argument appealing to ignorance, meaning that because one doesn't know the answer one must therefore accept your posit, that life was intelligently designed, without question.
LOL ... evolutionists are the ones that make the claim that life happened by chance. I lay out the minimal functions that the first life form to exist must exhibit. I ask the evolutionists to explain how such a complex organism could happen by chance (can a monkey type Milton's Paradise Lost by chance ?). Do I get an answer ? For the evolutionists cannot intelligently answer the question. I will ask the question again. How could such a complex organism happen by chance ? How can evolutionists support THEIR CLAIM that life happened by chance ?



#554534 Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Posted by thespin on 03 October 2005 - 09:16 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

I'm tired so I'll post the rest of my post tomorrow and address the easy sturff now. It should also be noted that in his book "Nature's Destiny" that he becomes an Evolutionist.  So I am not so sure if he is a reliable source for either side...at all....

View Post

It's easy to write an article. But to write a cogent article supported by real evidence verified by many independent sources is another matter. The article you linked to doesn't fall into this category. Denton's Evolution does. Denton's book is SCIENCE. The article linked to is more like a drawing room discussion.

His other book "Nature's Destiny" is not pure science so I won't use it. I haven't read it but it looks like he is getting into his own personal metaphysical beliefs. I may read it another time.

I like to avoid the life/evolution issue when discussing ID because evolutionists have been so successful in selling APPEARANCES as evidence. Denton debunks this. But since your last post rests there, I will say this about that:

Let's imagine the first life form in existence. What do we know about it ? It must be able to:
1) take in food energy
2) discriminate as to what food it takes in (else it would poison itself)
3) use the food/energy to maintain its structure (and for reproduction)
(we are talking many complex processes like protein production etc here)
4) separate and eliminate waste (else it would poison itself)
5) reproduce itself (an extremely complex process)
6) I think I should add 'evolve' here too for y'all even though it's 'accidental'

We tend to think that 'simple' life forms are simple. BUT THIS FIRST ORGANISM IS VERY, VERY, VERY COMPLEX.
How could such a complex organism happen by chance ?



#554402 Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Posted by thespin on 03 October 2005 - 05:26 PM in OCC Member's Lounge

First: What about the formation of the field of Evolution can be identified as bad science? What specific processes involved in this field are representative of bad science?
The assumption by evolutionists that similarities in APPEARANCE mean similarities in BASIC STRUCTURE. I encourage you to read Evolution by world famous microbiologist Michael Denton to see what's really happening as revealed at the microscopic level.

Second: "When Darwin came up with his theory, he thought that eventually it would be proven by the finding of links between species in the fossil record." <--- Are you sure? Apparently Darwin didn't think many "transitional species" would be found in the fossil records because of natural impurities in the environment and the fossil record itself.
Yes, I am sure. He states it in his original work The Origin of Species.

Third: "To cover their butts, evolutionists have lately modified their 'theory' to explain this lack saying that evoltionary changes don't happen over millions of years but in sudden spurts. What a crock!" <---- This theory is known as "Punctuated Equilibrium", and it is a fairly recent theory. This does not mean that "Evolutionists" are trying to "cover their butts". Science is open to speculation as long as one provides evidence that meets the standard requirements. If someone has a hypothesis supported by legitimate evidence, by scientific standards of course, then the hypothesis is promoted to a theory and is considered a possible explantion of phenomenon until proven otherwise.
The fact is that there was no scientific basis for their original hypothesis except APPEARANCES which is not evidence. Now they HAVE NO EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THEIR NEW HYPOTHESIS. AGAIN, it's just a cya 'theory' ...

Fourth: "The B52 argument are for those who say that the sophisticated design of the universe JUST EXISTS WITHOUT A CAUSE. Again if you were to find a B52 on mars tomorrow, would you say it had no cause ??" <--- You are assuming that which you are trying to prove with this argument. In other words, you are specifically creating an instance where the Universe would have to have design in order to form the conclusion that the hypothetical instance proves the existence of design. This presents the problem of data being initially biased to one point of view and disallows for one to draw a different conclusion. Yesh, the B-52 being on Mars would have to have an initial cause in this instance; however, it is only true for that hypothetical instance.
I give you that this particular argument does assume a design to the universe. I deal with this below ...

Fifth: "Anyone come up with an explanation for the existence of mathematically precise, invariable, simple, and harmonious (working together) natural laws that man discovers and applies in all his technological tools ?" <--- Simple, mathematics and the laws that we, as humans, have instantiated have been based solely on observation. We have fined tuned our sciences and mathematics to accurately represent the phenomenon which we observe. Our knowledge is based only on what we can know and it just so happens that some of our knowledge does a really good job at representing some phenomenon. The laws we apply are based solely on observation of the things which are observed.

To go further and argue that their consistency and reliability demand one to conclude the existence of a divine being is an argument not based on observation, for where in any observation has there been observed any intriniscal influence of a higher power? You claim that the presence of "beauty", "harmony", and "order" verify this; however, an observation is based solely on what the senses can observe, meaning observation is of an empirical nature, while the evidence you cite clearly indicates that the evidence is not of an empirical nature and instead consists of entirely of ideas about those observations, which are of an a priori nature, meaning that it is knowledge not based solely on observation. This is because properties such as "beauty" and "harmony" are indefinite representations of physical things and lack continuity in both application and definition.
This sounds like Clinton's "it depends on what the meaning of 'is' is." LOL Or maybe something from Martin Heidegger's ramblings (I know .. blasphemy! LOL).
WE DIDN'T FINE TUNE ANYTHING. WE OBSERVED IT. WE DESCRIBED WHAT WE OBSERVE USING THE BEST TOOL WE HAD - MATHEMATICS - WHICH IS A BRANCH OF KNOWLEDGE INDEPENDENT OF THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES. I might agree that Mathematics is within us since there are branches of mathematics based just on mind games and not on any observation. BUT our physical sciences are not within us. Our physical sciences ARE these mathematical descriptions of how the universe behaves and ALWAYS behaves.

MY argument is that there are very sophisticated patterns to the universe that demand an intelligent cause (seeing how they are more sophisticated than man can produce - man being our standard of intelligence). Without these patterns, the universe would be a chaotic mess if it existed at all. YOUR argument reduces to "I don't see God so God doesn't exist". But you have never seen an electron, a proton, a neutron etc. Do you believe they exist from the EVIDENCE that they exist?



#554200 Id Vs. Evolution In Public Schools

Posted by thespin on 03 October 2005 - 09:26 AM in OCC Member's Lounge

thespin, how is a B52 on mars relevant to this topic? i dont think that giving completely random hypothetical evidence is helping at all. and what you said about the sun being an incredibly complex masterpeice, i dont think it is so. this sun is a ball of hydrogen and helium that came together because of mutual gravitational attraction of the atoms. it gives off energy (in many forms) because of the nuclear fusion that began when the pressure and heat inside rose to sufficient levels (also due to gravity). if i need to explain nuclear fusion to make even clearer how completely un-mystical the sun is, please feel free to ask.

View Post

The B52 argument are for those who say that the sophisticated design of the universe JUST EXISTS WITHOUT A CAUSE. Again if you were to find a B52 on mars tomorrow, would you say it had no cause ??

My friend, I am a Physicist. And if you had any idea of the processes that occur in the sun and how those processes generate the other elements that we are familiar with, you wouldn't be so blase about it's DESIGN !

Evolution is BAD SCIENCE. When Darwin came up with his theory, he thought that eventually it would be proven by the finding of links between species in the fossil record. We always hear about 'the missing link' between man and ape. What is not generally known is that THERE ARE NO LINKS BETWEEN ANY TWO SPECIES, extinct or alive, in the fossil record. To cover their butts, evolutionists have lately modified their 'theory' to explain this lack saying that evoltionary changes don't happen over millions of years but in sudden spurts. What a crock!
They have also come up with two types of evolution, micro and macro. Micro evolution is basically what man does with dogs, breed them. This happens under natural pressures also. But there is NO evidence of macro evolution in the fossil record. All so-called evidence 'discovered' so far has later been found to be hoaxes.

Anyone come up with an explanation for the existence of mathematically precise, invariable, simple, and harmonious (working together) natural laws that man discovers and applies in all his technological tools ?